Specified Indebtedness - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 4: Line 4:
A simple and innocuous enough looking provision. Ahh, but what to make of the definition of [[borrowed money]]? Could it include [[repo]]? (No, according to Simon Firth - see [[borrowed money|here]])
A simple and innocuous enough looking provision. Ahh, but what to make of the definition of [[borrowed money]]? Could it include [[repo]]? (No, according to Simon Firth - see [[borrowed money|here]])


Of particular interest in the debate on {{isdaprov|Cross Default}}. Please refer to that section for a fuller discussion. see also the somewhat clumsier (but materially similar) definition of {{isdaprov|Specified Indebtedness}} in the {{efetma}}.
Of particular interest in the debate on {{isdaprov|Cross Default}}. Please refer to that section for a fuller discussion. see also the somewhat clumsier (but materially similar) definition of {{efetprov|Specified Indebtedness}} in the {{efetma}}.


{{isdaanatomy}}
{{isdaanatomy}}

Revision as of 08:57, 16 August 2012

In gory detail

1992 ISDA
Specified Indebtedness” means, subject to the Schedule, any obligation (whether present or future, contingent or otherwise, as principal or surety or otherwise) in respect of borrowed money.

(view template)

2002 ISDA
Specified Indebtedness” means, subject to the Schedule, any obligation (whether present or future, contingent or otherwise, as principal or surety or otherwise) in respect of borrowed money.

(view template)

Commentary

A simple and innocuous enough looking provision. Ahh, but what to make of the definition of borrowed money? Could it include repo? (No, according to Simon Firth - see here)

Of particular interest in the debate on Cross Default. Please refer to that section for a fuller discussion. see also the somewhat clumsier (but materially similar) definition of Specified Indebtedness in the EFET Master Agreement.