Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 5(a)(i): Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
===CSAs=== | ===CSAs=== | ||
There’s a technical funny due to the American habit of insisting on a pledge-only {{nycsa}} and then designating it as a {{isdaprov|Credit Support Document}} (against the hopes and dreams of {{icds}} when it drafted the | There’s a technical funny due to the American habit of insisting on a pledge-only {{nycsa}} and then designating it as a {{isdaprov|Credit Support Document}} (against the hopes and dreams of {{icds}} when it drafted the Users’ Guide, but still), and that is a failure to pay under an English law CSA is a Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(i)}} {{isdaprov|Failure to Pay or Deliver}}, whereas a failure to pay under a New York Law CSA is a Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(iii)}} {{isdaprov|Credit Support Default}}. | ||
Funny old world we live in. | Funny old world we live in. | ||
Revision as of 17:57, 6 May 2021
Failure to Pay under Section 5(a)(i) of the ISDA Master Agreement: where a party fails to pay or deliver on time and does not remedy before the grace period expires. The grace period for a 2002 ISDA is one Local Business Day; shorter than the three Local Business Days in the 1992 ISDA. This fact alone has kept a number of market counterparties on the 1992 form, nearly thirty years after it was upgraded.
CSAs
There’s a technical funny due to the American habit of insisting on a pledge-only 1994 New York law CSA and then designating it as a Credit Support Document (against the hopes and dreams of ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ when it drafted the Users’ Guide, but still), and that is a failure to pay under an English law CSA is a Section 5(a)(i) Failure to Pay or Deliver, whereas a failure to pay under a New York Law CSA is a Section 5(a)(iii) Credit Support Default.
Funny old world we live in.