83,229
edits
Template:Isda 5(a)(v) summ: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
We are talking about other derivative-''like'' transactions, between you and the same counterparty, where the counterparty presents a clear and present danger of blowing up, but where that behaviour has not yet manifested under the present {{isdama}}, meaning you have no grounds to blow them up directly. So, you know, fairly implausible scenario, but still. You want to use the event arising under this ''other'' {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}} to detonate the present ISDA. [[The squad]] breaks your ability to do so down in to four scenarios: | We are talking about other derivative-''like'' transactions, between you and the same counterparty, where the counterparty presents a clear and present danger of blowing up, but where that behaviour has not yet manifested under the present {{isdama}}, meaning you have no grounds to blow them up directly. So, you know, fairly implausible scenario, but still. You want to use the event arising under this ''other'' {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}} to detonate the present ISDA. [[The squad]] breaks your ability to do so down in to four scenarios: | ||
*Counterparty fails to pay amounts falling due ''before'' maturity on a {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, and you [[accelerate]] ''that'' transaction, but not necessarily others under the same [[master agreement]]. Here the principle is that ''any'' obligation to pay a sum of money on time is [[Fundamental breach|fundamental]], [[Time is of the essence|of the essence]] and speaks indelibly to a merchant’s credit, whether or not one accelerates other related Specified Transactions (though, actually, walk me through the scenarios in which you wouldn’t, or even weren’t ''obliged'' to?) | *Counterparty fails to pay amounts falling due ''before'' maturity on a {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, and you [[accelerate]] ''that'' transaction, but not necessarily others under the same [[master agreement]]. Here the principle is that ''any'' obligation to pay a sum of money on time is [[Fundamental breach|fundamental]], [[Time is of the essence|of the essence]] and speaks indelibly to a merchant’s credit, whether or not one accelerates other related Specified Transactions (though, actually, walk me through the scenarios in which you wouldn’t, or even weren’t ''obliged'' to?) | ||
*Counterparty fails to pay amounts falling due ''at'' maturity on a {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, so you can’t “accelerate” as such on ''that'' {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, as it has matured, but you are still out of pocket and of a mind to press a big red button; | *Counterparty fails to pay amounts falling due ''at'' maturity on a {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, so you can’t “accelerate” as such on ''that'' {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, as it has matured, but you are still out of pocket and of a mind to press a big red button — though, again, curiously, only on ''this'' {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}} and not the other outstanding transactions under the same master agreement, even though you ''could''; | ||
*Counterparty [[Failure to deliver|fails to ''deliver'']] assets due under a {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, and as a result you accelerate '''''the''''' {{isda92prov|Specified Transaction}} ({{1992isda}}) or '''''all''''' {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}}s under the affected [[master agreement]] ({{2002isda}} — the 2002 version being designed to carve out things like [[mini close-out]] under a {{gmsla}} as these are not credit-related; | *Counterparty [[Failure to deliver|fails to ''deliver'']] assets due under a {{{{{1}}}|Specified Transaction}}, and as a result you accelerate '''''the''''' {{isda92prov|Specified Transaction}} ({{1992isda}}) or '''''all''''' {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}}s under the affected [[master agreement]] ({{2002isda}} — the 2002 version being designed to carve out things like [[mini close-out]] under a {{gmsla}} as these are not credit-related; | ||
*Counterparty [[Repudiation|presents you an extended middle finger]] generally with regard to any obligation under any Specified Transaction, whether you accelerate it or not. Here if your counterparty is playing craziest dude in the room, it has committed a [[repudiatory breach]] thereby losing what moral high-ground it might otherwise stand on to expect you to follow form and protocol before closing it out. | *Counterparty [[Repudiation|presents you an extended middle finger]] generally with regard to any obligation under any Specified Transaction, whether you accelerate it or not. Here if your counterparty is playing craziest dude in the room, it has committed a [[repudiatory breach]] thereby losing what moral high-ground it might otherwise stand on to expect you to follow form and protocol before closing it out. | ||