Template:M comp disc 2002 ISDA 13: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{jc:{{template:Embedded template tester}}}}
{{jc:{{embedded template tester}} }}
Largely the same, in practical effect, between the two versions: the clause grants the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the governing law you have chosen: you can launch proceedings wherever you like, but you can’t complain if they are launched in a home court, which leaves open that you ''might'' complain if they are launched in some other, inconvenient, court.  
Largely the same, in practical effect, between the two versions: the clause grants the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the governing law you have chosen: you can launch proceedings wherever you like, but you can’t complain if they are launched in a home court, which leaves open that you ''might'' complain if they are launched in some other, inconvenient, court.  



Revision as of 09:09, 20 May 2023

[Template fetch failed for https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Template:PASS&action=render: HTTP 404] Largely the same, in practical effect, between the two versions: the clause grants the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the governing law you have chosen: you can launch proceedings wherever you like, but you can’t complain if they are launched in a home court, which leaves open that you might complain if they are launched in some other, inconvenient, court.

No doubt a litigation lawyer would be outraged at this suggestion that the versions mean different things, but life’s too short.

2002 version of ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ were properly phoning it in on this one. There are some changes, but none of them mean anything.