82,891
edits
Template:Csa expenses: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Paragraph {{csaprov|8}} of the {{vmcsa}} is identical to the equivalent in the {{csa}}. Being a function of the common law of contract, not to me...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===English law CSAs=== | |||
Paragraph {{csaprov|8}} of the {{vmcsa}} is identical to the [[8 - CSA Provision|equivalent]] in the {{csa}}. Being a function of the [[common law]] of [[contract]], not to mention common sense — why would someone else be liable for your costs and expenses of performing a contract unless it specifically said they would be? — it falls into the goes without saying category. But {{icds}} said it anyway. | Paragraph {{csaprov|8}} of the {{vmcsa}} is identical to the [[8 - CSA Provision|equivalent]] in the {{csa}}. Being a function of the [[common law]] of [[contract]], not to mention common sense — why would someone else be liable for your costs and expenses of performing a contract unless it specifically said they would be? — it falls into the goes without saying category. But {{icds}} said it anyway. | ||
===NY law CSA=== | |||
Paragraph {{nyvmcsaprov|10(a)}} of the {{nyvmcsa}} is largely the same as Paragraph {{vmcsaprov|8}} of the English law versions — it carries on in {{nyvmcsaprov|10(b)}} and {{nyvmcsaprov|10(c)}} to rabbit on a bit about {{nyvmcsaprov|Posted Collateral}} — but, neglects to specifically call out [[stamp duty]]. How to deal with stamp duties is the subject of Paragraphs {{nyvmcsaprov|10(b)}} and {{nyvmcsaprov|10(c)}}, of which there is no equivalent in the English law document. <br> | |||