Template:M summ EUA Annex (d)(i)(2): Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:
:(D) If you deliver outside the normal window during business hours, your delivery is deemed satisfied at the next moment where a window on business hours opens. Workaday stuff that will be familiar with anyone who deals with the settlement of securities for a living.
:(D) If you deliver outside the normal window during business hours, your delivery is deemed satisfied at the next moment where a window on business hours opens. Workaday stuff that will be familiar with anyone who deals with the settlement of securities for a living.


But (B) — what this is getting at is harder to figure. By simply designating a Holding Account — thereby turning it into a {{euaprov|Specified Holding Account}} — why should a {{euaprov|Delivering Party}}’s obligation thereby be ''limited'' to delivering from that {{euaprov|Holding Account}}? If it is empty, does that create some kind of [[impossibility]] or [[frustration]] as a grounds for release from the contract? This seems a peculiar outcome. If {{euaprov|Delivering Party}} has other {{euaprov|Holding Account}}s is it not obliged to deliver from those? We cannot imagine this was intended. If the {{euaprov|Specified Holding Account}} is empty or immobilised, perhaps due to some service-provider failure elsewhere, could not the {{euaprov|Delivering Party}} nominate delivery directly from a market counterparty into the {{euaprov|Receiving Party}}’s account?
But (B) — what this is getting at is harder to figure. By simply designating a {{euaprov|Holding Account}} — thereby turning it into a {{euaprov|Specified Holding Account}} — why should a {{euaprov|Delivering Party}}’s obligation thereby be ''limited'' to delivering from that {{euaprov|Holding Account}}?  
 
If it is empty, does that create some kind of [[impossibility]] or [[frustration of contract|frustration]] as a grounds for release from the contract? That would seem a peculiar outcome. If {{euaprov|Delivering Party}} has other {{euaprov|Holding Account}}s is it not obliged to deliver from those? We cannot imagine this was intended. If the {{euaprov|Specified Holding Account}} is empty or immobilised, perhaps due to some service-provider failure elsewhere, could not the {{euaprov|Delivering Party}} nominate delivery directly from a market counterparty into the {{euaprov|Receiving Party}}’s account?


So many questions.
So many questions.