Template:Isda 2(a) comp: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)}} is identical in the {{1992ma}} and the {{2002ma}}. However the subsidiary definition of {{isdaprov|Scheduled Settlement Date}} — a date in which any Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(i)}} obligations fall due — is a new and frankly uncalled-for innovation in the {{2002ma}}. We have a special page dedicated to Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}}, by the way. That is a brute, and one of the most litigationey parts of the Agreement.") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)}} is identical in the {{1992ma}} and the {{2002ma}}. However the subsidiary definition of {{isdaprov|Scheduled Settlement Date}} — a date in which any Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(i)}} obligations fall due — is a new and frankly uncalled-for innovation in the {{2002ma}}. | The {{1987ma}}, being concerned only with interest rates and currency exchange, does not contemplate ''delivery'', as such. Delivery implies non-cash assets. Therefore portions of {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(i)}} and {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(ii)}} were augmented in the {{1992ma}} to cater for this contingency. The {{1992ma}} also added a [[condition precedent]] to the [[flawed asset]] clause (Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(iii)}}) that no {{{{{1}}}|Early Termination Date}} had been designated. | ||
Thereafter Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)}} is identical in the {{1992ma}} and the {{2002ma}}. However the subsidiary definition of {{isdaprov|Scheduled Settlement Date}} — a date in which any Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(i)}} obligations fall due — is a new and frankly uncalled-for innovation in the {{2002ma}}. | |||
We have a special page dedicated to Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}}, by the way. That is a brute, and one of the most [[litigationey]] parts of the Agreement. | We have a special page dedicated to Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}}, by the way. That is a brute, and one of the most [[litigationey]] parts of the Agreement. | ||
Latest revision as of 14:47, 1 February 2024
The 1987 ISDA, being concerned only with interest rates and currency exchange, does not contemplate delivery, as such. Delivery implies non-cash assets. Therefore portions of {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(i)}} and {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(ii)}} were augmented in the 1992 ISDA to cater for this contingency. The 1992 ISDA also added a condition precedent to the flawed asset clause (Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(iii)}}) that no {{{{{1}}}|Early Termination Date}} had been designated.
Thereafter Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)}} is identical in the 1992 ISDA and the 2002 ISDA. However the subsidiary definition of Scheduled Settlement Date — a date in which any Section {{{{{1}}}|2(a)(i)}} obligations fall due — is a new and frankly uncalled-for innovation in the 2002 ISDA.
We have a special page dedicated to Section 2(a)(iii), by the way. That is a brute, and one of the most litigationey parts of the Agreement.