Termination Event - ISDA Provision

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ISDA Anatomy

incorporating our exclusive ISDA in a Nutshell™

In a Nutshell Section Termination Event:

Termination Event” means an Illegality, a Force Majeure Event, a Tax Event, a Tax Event Upon Merger an applicable Credit Event Upon Merger or an Additional Termination Event.
view template

2002 ISDA full text of Section Termination Event:

Termination Event” means an Illegality, a Force Majeure Event, a Tax Event, a Tax Event Upon Merger or, if specified to be applicable, a Credit Event Upon Merger or an Additional Termination Event.
view template

Click here for the text of Section Termination Event in the 1992 ISDA


Resources Wikitext | Nutshell wikitext | 1992 ISDA wikitext | 2002 vs 1992 Showdown | 2006 ISDA Definitions | 2008 ISDA | JC’s ISDA code project
Navigation Preamble | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
Events of Default: 5(a)(i) Failure to Pay or Deliver5(a)(ii) Breach of Agreement5(a)(iii) Credit Support Default5(a)(iv) Misrepresentation5(a)(v) Default Under Specified Transaction5(a)(vi) Cross Default5(a)(vii) Bankruptcy5(a)(viii) Merger without Assumption
Termination Events: 5(b)(i) Illegality5(b)(ii) Force Majeure Event5(b)(iii) Tax Event5(b)(iv) Tax Event Upon Merger5(b)(v) Credit Event Upon Merger5(b)(vi) Additional Termination Event

Index — Click ᐅ to expand:

Get in touch
Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Sign up for our newsletter? Questions? We’d love to hear from you.
BREAKING: Get the new weekly newsletter here Old editions here


A comparison between the 1992 ISDA and the 2002 ISDA can be found on the ISDA Comparison page.

A trick for young players

Best Practice Note: Therefore adding any new Termination Event must ALWAYS be achieved by labelling it a new “Additional Termination Event” under Section 5(b)(v), and not a separate event under a new Section 5(b)(vi) etc. If, instead of being expressed as an “Additional Termination Event”, which is how the ISDA Mechanism is intended to operate, it is set out as a new “5(b)(vi)” it is not designated therefore as any of an “Illegality”, “Tax Event”, “Tax Event Upon Merger”, “Credit Event Upon Merger” or “Additional Termination Event”, so therefore, read literally, is not caught by the definition of “Termination Event” and none of the Termination provisions bite on it.

I mention this because we have seen it happen. You can take a “fair, large and liberal view" that what the parties intended was to create an ATE, but why suffer that anxiety?

See also