Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 12
Who would have thought a notices provision would be so controversial? Especially the question, “what is an electronic messaging system”?
No-one, it is humbly submitted, until Andrews, J. of the Chancery Division, was invited to opine on Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc, the kind of “little old lady” case that makes bad law.[1] The learned judge does nothing to dispel the assumption that lawyers are technological Luddites who would apply Tip-Ex to their VDUs if they didn't have someone to do their typing for them (and if they knew what a VDU was).
For there it was held that email is not an “electronic messaging system” and, as such, was an invalid means for serving a close-out notice under the 1992 ISDA which doesn’t mention email.
While we’re on the subject, who seriously has a telex in this day and age?
Read in depth about that case here.
- ↑ As the JC always says, anus matronae parvae malas leges faciunt.