Template:M summ Credit Derivatives 4.2: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[[4.2 - Credit Derivatives Provision|Differences]] with Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(vii)}}:
[[4.2 - Credit Derivatives Provision|Differences]] with Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(vii)}}:
*Doesn’t cover [[credit support provider]]s (being an ISDA concept, not hugely relevant to debt securities) or {{cddprov|guarantor}}s (but that is converted elsewhere, directly).
*Doesn’t cover {{isdaprov|Credit Support Provider}}s or {{isdaprov|Specified Entities}} (being a specific type of credit mitigant to a private [[OTC]] bilateral trading agreement, like an {{isdama}} which, being a private contract is not naturally thee kind of thing that triggers [[credit derivative]]s) nor {{cddprov|guarantor}}s (but that is converted elsewhere, directly).
*Simplified provision (d) which is less bothered about who institutes the proceedings, and less particular about the types of formal insolvency process one can go through, so is a bit more “[[fair large and liberal]]”.
*Simplified provision (d) which is less bothered about who institutes the proceedings, and less particular about the types of formal insolvency process one can go through, so is a bit more “[[fair large and liberal]]”.
*No catch-all “or takes any steps in furtherance of the above” rider at the end to sweep up a loss of nerve or weirdo jurisdictions.
*No catch-all “or takes any steps in furtherance of the above” rider at the end to sweep up a loss of nerve or weirdo jurisdictions.