82,892
edits
Template:2(a)(iii): Difference between revisions
→Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}} litigation
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===Section | ===Section 2(a)(iii) litigation=== | ||
There is a (generous) handful of important authorities on the effect under [[English law]] or [[New York law]] of the suspension of obligations under the most [[litigationey]] clause in the {{isdama}}, Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}}. They consider whether [[flawed asset]] provision amounts to an “[[ipso facto]] clause” under the [[US Bankruptcy Code]] or violates the “[[anti-deprivation]]” principle under [[English law]]. Those cases are: | There is a (generous) handful of important authorities on the effect under [[English law]] or [[New York law]] of the suspension of obligations under the most [[litigationey]] clause in the {{isdama}}, Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}}. They consider whether [[flawed asset]] provision amounts to an “[[ipso facto]] clause” under the [[US Bankruptcy Code]] or violates the “[[anti-deprivation]]” principle under [[English law]]. Those cases are: | ||
*{{casenote|Lomas|Firth Rixson}} | *{{casenote|Lomas|Firth Rixson}} | ||