82,882
edits
Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 5(b)(i): Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==={{isdaprov|Illegality}} vs. {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} smackdown=== | ==={{isdaprov|Illegality}} vs. {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} smackdown=== | ||
Like a {{isdaprov|Force Majeure Event}}, an {{isdaprov|Illegality}} may only be triggered after exhausting the fallbacks and remedies specified in the {{2002ma}}. | Like a {{isdaprov|Force Majeure Event}}, an {{isdaprov|Illegality}} may only be triggered after exhausting the fallbacks and remedies specified in the {{2002ma}}. | ||
==={{isdaprov|Hierarchy of Events}}=== | ==={{isdaprov|Hierarchy of Events}}=== | ||
Under the {{2002ma}}, Section {{isdaprov|5(c)}} (''{{isdaprov|Hierarchy of Events}}'') intervenes to provide that (i) {{isdaprov|Illegality}} trumps {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} and (ii) {{isdaprov|Illegality}} and {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} both trump the {{isdaprov|Failure to Pay}} and {{isdaprov|Breach of Agreement}} {{isdaprov|Events of Default}}. Given that {{isdaprov|Illegality}} is no longer subject to the | Under the {{2002ma}}, Section {{isdaprov|5(c)}} (''{{isdaprov|Hierarchy of Events}}'') intervenes to provide that (i) {{isdaprov|Illegality}} trumps {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} and (ii) {{isdaprov|Illegality}} and {{isdaprov|Force Majeure}} both trump the {{isdaprov|Failure to Pay}} and {{isdaprov|Breach of Agreement}} {{isdaprov|Events of Default}}. Given that {{isdaprov|Illegality}} is no longer subject to the “two {{isdaprov|Affected Parties}}” delay on termination (as it was in the {{1992ma}}), this is significant. | ||