Two Affected Parties - ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{isdaanat|6(b)(iii)}}
{{isdamanual|6(b)(iii)}}
Be careful here: Under the {{1992ma}}, if your {{isdaprov|Failure To Pay}} is also an {{isdaprov|Illegality}} it is treated as an {{isdaprov|Illegality}}: if there are two {{isdaprov|Affected Parties}} you will face a significant delay when closing out. A bit of a {{t|trick for young players}}.
 
===Differences between {{1992ma}} and {{2002ma}}===
Note also that reference to {{isdaprov|Illegality}} has been excised from the {{2002ma}} version.
 
They changed this because in practice, it turned out to too be hard to implement a transfer or amendment after an {{isdaprov|Illegality}}.  Folks realised that if an {{isdaprov|Illegality}} happens you don’t want to have to wait 30 days to terminate, especially if you can’t rely on {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}} to withhold payments in the meantime.

Navigation menu