Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 5(a)(ii): Difference between revisions

Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 5(a)(ii) (view source)

Revision as of 09:08, 25 February 2020

1,006 bytes removed , 25 February 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 A failure to perform any agreement, if not cured within 30 days, is an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, except for
 :(i) those failures who have their own special {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} (ie {{isdaprov|Failure to Pay or Deliver}} under Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(i)}}) or
-:(ii) those that relate to tax, and which mean the party not complying will just get clipped for tax it rather would not.
+:(ii) those that relate to tax, and which mean the party not complying will just get clipped for [[tax]] it rather would not.
-==={{isdaprov|Failure to Pay or Deliver}} carve-out===
-Why is Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(i)}} specifically carved out?  No good reason other than general [[ISDA]] neurosis/delight in over-communicating. Yes, it has its own separate {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, with a much tighter timeline, so in practice one would never realistically trigger a [[failure to pay]] as a {{isdaprov|5(a)(ii)}} event, but it is still a bit fussy carving it out.
-''[[ISDA]]{{tm}}. Never knowingly outfussed.{{tm}}''
-===It is an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}} not to supply {{isdaprov|documents for delivery}}===
-A failure to {{isdaprov|Furnish Specified Information}} — ie those {{isdaprov|documents for delivery}} specified in {{isdaprov|Part 3}} of the {{isdama}}, adverted to in Section {{isdaprov|4(a)(ii)}} ''will'' therefore be an {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}, although you have to navigate a needlessly tortured string of clause cross references and [[double negative|double negatives]] to settle upon this conclusion.