No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry
|
|
- Charlene Madlyn Evans
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 March 2018 No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc v National Power Corporation Contents A party closing out a 2002 ISDA Master Agreement must use commercially reasonable procedures to determine the close-out amount that is due with a view to reaching a commercially reasonable result but what standard of reasonableness applies? Is it enough to show that there was no irrationality or bad faith or does the determination have to be justifiable on objective grounds? And if it turns out that an error was made, can the determining party correct it by providing a revised calculation statement? The reasonableness standard... 1 Choice of quotations... 3 Ability to revise a calculation statement... 3 Conclusion... 5 The occasion for these issues to be considered was the termination, following the collapse of the Lehman Brothers group, of a currency swap between National Power Corporation ( NPC ) and Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc ( LBSF ). NPC was required to determine the close-out amount due under the Agreement and so, on the Early Termination Date, it sought (and received) three indicative quotations for a replacement transaction. These were followed up, four days later, by a series of firm quotations from the same dealers and, the following week, NPC entered into a replacement transaction with the dealer that had offered the most favourable terms. NPC s original calculation statement had demanded a close-out amount based on the cost of the transaction it had entered into. However, it sought to withdraw this and make a revised determination based on the indicative quotation originally offered by that dealer. This was less favourable to NPC than the price it eventually accepted and so it sought to increase the amount it claimed from LBSF. The reasonableness standard Under the 1992 version of the ISDA Master Agreement, a determination of a party s Loss must be made reasonably and in good faith. The word reasonably, in this context, has been held to be a reference to Wednesbury reasonableness, i.e. the determining party must act rationally, so that its decision can be attacked if it is one that no reasonable determining party could reach (Fondazione Enasarco v Lehman Brothers Finance SA [2015] EWHC (Ch), [53]). In Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc v National Power Corporation [2018] EWHC 487 (Comm), however, Robin Knowles J held that, as the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement uses a different formulation, a No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry 1
2 different conclusion applies. The requirement to use commercially reasonable procedures and act with a view to reaching a commercially reasonable result are both objective standards and must be judged by reference to what a reasonable person would have done in the same situation. The standard that applies is therefore not rationality but objective reasonableness. This does not mean that the court will substitute its own determination whenever it would have reached a different decision. As the judge made clear, rationality and objective reasonableness both allow for a result that falls within a range. Even if an objective standard applies, there is scope for reasonable differences of opinion. As long as the determining party s assessment falls within that range and is made in good faith (rather than, for example, taking the result that suits it best at one end of the range) it will be acting reasonably. What, then, is the practical difference between Wednesbury unreasonableness and the objective standard? The answer to this question is somewhat obscured by the way in which this aspect of the Wednesbury test has been formulated. Asking whether the decision maker has come to a conclusion so unreasonable that no reasonable [decision maker] could have come to it provides little help in distinguishing the test from objective reasonableness, which is also assessed by reference to the reasonable decision maker. There is, however, a difference of degree between the two tests. For example, in negligent valuation cases, where the objective standard applies, a professional valuer will typically be allowed a 10 per cent margin of error from the figure that the court considers a competent valuer would have arrived at (Singer & Friedlander Ltd v John D Wood & Co [1977] 2 EGLR 84, 85). In contrast, in the public law sphere, the Wednesbury test has colourfully been said to involve asking whether the decision maker has temporarily taken leave of his senses (R v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Nottinghamshire County Council [1986] AC 240, 247). As Auld LJ put it in O Conner v Chief Adjudication Officer [1999] 1 FLR 1200, 1210, good old Wednesbury irrationality is about as an extreme form of irrationality as there is. Although in recent years, the courts have taken a more nuanced approach, applying a sliding scale depending on the nature of the challenge, this illustrates the difficulty of mounting a challenge on the basis that the outcome was irrational. The standard that applies to objective reasonableness is significantly less exacting. It is important to bear in mind that rationality also focuses on the decisionmaking process. For example, there is a requirement to exclude extraneous considerations and to take into account any considerations that are obviously relevant (Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd [2015] 1 WLR 1661, [29]). Indeed, it is strongly arguable that the only reason why the outcome is relevant in the context of rationality is because it shows that something must have gone wrong with the decision-making process, even if it is impossible to identify the precise error that was made. A close-out determination under the 1992 ISDA No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry 2
3 Master Agreement can therefore be attacked if there is a fundamental flaw in the methodology used (as, for example, where it is based on prices that are obviously out of date), even if the outcome is not so extreme as to justify a challenge in isolation. However, this requires evidence about how the determining party reached its decision, which may not be readily available. Choice of quotations The 2002 ISDA Master Agreement requires the determining party to make its determination as of the Early Termination Date or, if that would not be commercially reasonable, as soon thereafter as would be commercially reasonable. Under its original calculation statement, NPC had not made its determination as of the Early Termination Date, despite having obtained indicative quotations on that date, as it had used the firm quotations obtained four days later. Whether this was permissible therefore turned on whether it would have been commercially reasonable to use the indicative quotations. Robin Knowles J held that, in the circumstances of the case, it would not have been commercially reasonable to have made the determination as of the Early Termination Date. That would have involved using indicative quotations even though, by the time the determination was made, firm quotations had become available. It was not only legitimate to use the firm quotations in preference to the indicative quotations, it would have been unreasonable to do otherwise. This illustrates the fact that, even though the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement expressly allows the determining party to take indicative quotations into consideration, they should not be used where a firm quotation, or an actual trading price, is available. The same is true of the use of financial modelling, except perhaps on the rare occasions on which it would be unreasonable to enter into a replacement transaction on the basis of any firm quotation that has been obtained. It also indicates that the fact that firm quotations are not available on the Early Termination Date is not necessarily an obstacle, at least if they can be obtained within a reasonable period thereafter. Ability to revise a calculation statement In light of this conclusion, there was no prospect of NPC being allowed to revise its calculation statement in the way it wished, as that would have involved it substituting an unreasonable determination for a reasonable one. Even if the original determination had been invalid, however, the judge held that a fresh calculation statement could not have been provided as there is no provision in the Agreement for a second attempt. Where a determination is invalid, it will be for the court to state what the close-out amount would have been on a determination that was without error. A revised calculation statement may, however, be used as evidence of what that determination would have been, as well as whether there was an error in the first place. That conclusion would seem to be equally applicable to the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement. No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry 3
4 In many cases, little is likely to turn on this point. Where a discretion is invalidly exercised, the court is required to determine what decision would have been made in the absence of an error by putting itself into the shoes of the decision maker (Socimer International Bank Ltd v Standard Bank London Ltd [2008] 1 Lloyd s Rep 558, [65]). Where the determining party purports to correct a mistake in a calculation statement by providing a revised statement that has been drawn up reasonably and in good faith, that will often constitute good evidence of the approach it would have taken if it had performed the task correctly in the first place. However, there are situations in which the point could be material. If the determining party were able to revise the original determination, it could take account of any facts that had come to light in the intervening period. On the other hand, a determination by the court of the result that would have been reached if the discretion had been properly exercised must be made on the basis of the facts that were in existence at the time that such exercise would have taken place. A more fundamental point is whether, under the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement, a discretion is given at all. Robin Knowles J said that he was not convinced that it is. There is no doubt that the determining party has control over the timing of the decision-making process and scope for deciding how to go about the task, but it is required to come up with a result that, looking at the matter objectively, is commercially reasonable. Arguably, therefore, there is a single, objectively justifiable, result that the determining party is supposed to target. As we have seen, the fact that there is room for reasonable disagreement about what that result should be means that, as long as it falls within the appropriate range and uses a commercially reasonable methodology, it will be upheld. Provided that the determining party performs the task correctly, it makes very little difference whether or not this is characterised as the exercise of a discretion. On either basis, that party s choice of methodology will prevail. However, it raises the question of what approach the court should take in the event of an error. Should it then make its own assessment of the position, on the basis of the methodology it considers to be appropriate, or should it ascertain what the determining party would have done if it had not made a mistake? As noted above, where there is an allegation of negligence in a professional valuation, the court will determine, on the basis of all the evidence, what the result should have been and then ask whether the defendant s valuation fell within the permitted range either side of that valuation. If it did not, the damages will be based on the court s assessment of the true value (South Australia Asset Management Corp v York Montague Ltd [1997] AC 191, 221). This is different from asking what result the defendant would have come up with if it had performed the task correctly, as it may still not have hit the objectively justifiable target. Although the task to be carried out under the ISDA Master Agreement is different from the valuation of a business or a property, a similar approach is probably required. Hence, in the Lehman Brothers case, Robin Knowles J said that, where a decision maker has made No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry 4
5 a decision not open to it, the court will decide what a decision on entirely objective criteria would be. Conclusion The case illustrates the much more exacting standard that applies to a closeout determination under the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement, when compared to the 1992 version of that Agreement, and the care that needs to be taken by a determining party. As long as it can justify its approach, it will have a degree of latitude over the preferred methodology, as well as the timing of the valuation. However, if it falls into error, this flexibility will be lost. It will not get a second chance. Simon Firth No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry 5
6 Contacts For further information please contact: Hong Kong: Chin-Chong Liew Partner (+852) Victor Wan Partner (+852) I-Ping Soong Counsel (+852) Simon Zhang Counsel (+852) Stephen Song Managing Associate Author: Simon Firth This publication is intended merely to highlight issues and not to be comprehensive, nor to provide legal advice. Should you have any questions on issues reported here or on other areas of law, please contact one of your regular contacts, or contact the editors. Linklaters LLP. All Rights reserved 2018 Linklaters LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC It is a law firm authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. The term partner in relation to Linklaters LLP is used to refer to a member of Linklaters LLP or an employee or consultant of Linklaters LLP or any of its affiliated firms or entities with equivalent standing and qualifications. A list of the names of the members of Linklaters LLP together with a list of those non-members who are designated as partners and their professional qualifications is open to inspection at its registered office, One Silk Street, London EC2Y 8HQ or on and such persons are either solicitors, registered foreign lawyers or European lawyers. Please refer to for important information on Linklaters LLP s regulatory position. We currently hold your contact details, which we use to send you newsletters such as this and for other marketing and business communications. We use your contact details for our own internal purposes only. This information is available to our offices worldwide and to those of our associated firms. If any of your details are incorrect or have recently changed, or if you no longer wish to receive this newsletter or other marketing communications, please let us know by ing us at marketing.database@linklaters.com. (+852) stephen.song@linklaters.com Singapore: Sonia Lim Counsel (+65) sonia.lim@linklaters.com or any of your other usual Linklaters contacts. Linklaters 10th Floor, Alexandra House Chater Road Hong Kong Telephone (+852) No Second Bite at the ISDA Valuation Cherry 6 A /0.2/21 Mar 2018
Recent Supreme Court Notice Potential effect on the adoption of Close-out Netting in China
November 2016 Recent Supreme Court Notice Potential effect on the adoption of Close-out Netting in China The Supreme Court issued a series of bankruptcy-related judicial rules recently in order to streamline
More informationHigh Court confirms objective standard of reasonableness in the determination of the Close-out Amount under the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement
April 2018 High Court confirms objective standard of reasonableness in the determination of the Close-out Amount under the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement In Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. v National
More informationSingapore High Court: Unravelling the unwind of accumulator contracts.
February 2016 Singapore High Court: Unravelling the unwind of accumulator contracts. Introduction On 10 February 2016, the Singapore High Court in Tan Poh Leng Stanley v UBS AG [2016] SGHC 17 delivered
More informationSection 2(a)(iii) of the ISDA Master Agreement: its enforceability and effect
22 December 2010 Section 2(a)(iii) of the ISDA Master Agreement: its enforceability and effect Lomas v JFB Firth Rixon, Inc [2010] EWHC 3372 (Ch) In a judgment handed down on 21 December 2010, the High
More informationRegulatory enforcement proceedings
Regulatory enforcement proceedings The aim of this note is to give practical guidance on the likely course of enforcement proceedings instituted by the FCA. Set out below is an overview of the process.
More informationRetroactive application of the Damages Directive
April 2017 Retroactive application of the Damages Directive Executive Summary EU Directive 2014/104/EU (the Damages Directive ) was due to be transposed into Member States national laws by 27 December
More informationThe Bribery Act Adequate procedures.
October 2010 The Bribery Act 2010. Adequate procedures. We set out in this note our suggestions as to the adequate procedures that a company may consider adopting as part of its process of updating compliance
More informationThe President has signed the Act on the Change of the Act on Competition and Consumer Protection and the Act the Civil Procedure Code
30 June 2014 The President has signed the Act on the Change of the Act on Competition and Consumer Protection and the Act the Civil Procedure Code Introduction On 10 June 2014, having considered amendments
More informationSECOND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL SWAPS AND DERIVATIVES ASSOCIATION, INC. ("ISDA")
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) A2/2011/0070, A2/2011/1059, A3/2011/1107 & A3/2011/2106 ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION, COMMERCIAL COURT) SECOND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
More informationDawn Raid Update. Practical tips. April Contents
April 2013 Dawn Raid Update. Dawn raids continue to be an important investigatory tool for the Commission particularly in relation to cartels. There have been over 20 dawn raids conducted by the Commission
More informationGMRAs a review of two recent cases in the English High Court
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION GROUP WEBCAST SERIES 2017 GMRAs a review of two recent cases in the English High Court Jeremy Livingston, associate In this edition, we will focus on two recent
More informationThe enforceability of structured finance subordination provisions: where to next?
Page 1 Journal of International Banking & Financial Law/2010 Volume 25/Issue 5, May/Articles/The enforceability of structured finance subordination provisions: where to next? - (2010) 5 JIBFL 284 Journal
More informationNAFMII MASTER AGREEMENT (2009 VERSION)
For Reference Only NAFMII MASTER AGREEMENT (2009 VERSION) (English Translation) Copyright National Association of Financial Market Institutional Investors 2009 Statement on English Translation This English
More informationStructured Finance Subordination Provisions Upheld by High Court
Structured Finance Subordination Provisions Upheld by High Court Nick Shiren and Marco Crosignani This article explains a recent decision by England s High Court which highlights some of the uncertainties
More informationInterpretation of contracts - liberalism re-affirmed
Interpretation of contracts - liberalism re-affirmed In Re Sigma Finance Corporation (in administrative receivership) [2009] UKSC 2 Case analysis by Caroline Edwards Interpretation of contracts liberalism
More informationLatham & Watkins Finance Department
Number 1147 February 17, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Finance Department The Settlement does not affirm or overturn Judge Peck s controversial decision in the US Litigation barring enforcement of
More informationGood Deals Gone Bad Structuring Transactions to Reduce the Risk of Litigation
Good Deals Gone Bad Structuring Transactions to Reduce the Risk of Litigation Most Frequently Litigated Contractual Provisions Lori E. Lightfoot Partner +1 312 701 8680 llightfoot@mayerbrown.com Michael
More informationThe netting decision of the German Federal Court of Justice key issues
The netting decision of the German Federal Court of Justice key issues 1 Newsletter June 2016 The netting decision of the German Federal Court of Justice key issues The decision of the German Federal Court
More informationNavigating the money laundering minefield the Court of Appeal dismissed the constitutional challenge against the no consent regime Introduction OSCO
Newsletter February 2019 Criminal Litigation Navigating the money laundering minefield the Court of Appeal dismissed the constitutional challenge against the no consent regime Introduction In Interush
More informationENFORCING COMPLEX ISLAMIC FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS UNDER ENGLISH LAW
BRIEFING ENFORCING COMPLEX ISLAMIC FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS UNDER ENGLISH LAW FEBRUARY 2018 ENGLISH HIGH COURT HOLDS THAT A POTENTIALLY NON-SHARI A COMPLIANT FINANCING ARRANGEMENT STILL ENFORCEABLE AS A
More informationIN THE MATTER OF LEHMAN BROTHERS INTERNATIONAL (EUROPE) AND IN THE MATTER OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT 1986
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) A2/2011/0070 ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CHANCERY DIVISION, COMPANIES COURT) (MR JUSTICE BRIGGS) IN THE MATTER OF LEHMAN BROTHERS INTERNATIONAL (EUROPE)
More informationUndertakings Ben Handy, Barrister, St John s Chambers
Undertakings Ben Handy, Barrister, St John s Chambers Published on 25 March 2014 What is an undertaking? a statement, given orally or in writing, whether or not it includes the word undertake or undertaking,
More informationLatham & Watkins Finance Department
Number 1025 May 13, 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Finance Department Pending a decision on BNY s appeal, structured transaction and derivative lawyers should carefully consider the drafting of current
More informationLEGAL ISSUES IN ARBITRATIONS - WHEN AND HOW TO TAKE LEGAL ADVICE
LEGAL ISSUES IN ARBITRATIONS - WHEN AND HOW TO TAKE LEGAL ADVICE A paper for the Rural Arbix conference on 15 October 2015 1. The options 1. If a legal issue comes up in an arbitration, there are five
More informationDisputes bringing cases to the First-tier Property Tribunal and alternatives
Service Charges An Introductory Workshop Disputes bringing cases to the First-tier Property Tribunal and alternatives Speaker: Lucy Walsh Senior Associate Trowers & Hamlins Presentation 2 December 2013
More informationChallenging Government decisions in the UK. An introduction to judicial review
Challenging Government decisions in the UK An introduction to judicial review Challenging Government decisions in the UK Further information If you would like further information on any aspect of challenging
More informationb) pursuant to its terms, the Addendum is supplemented by one or more collateral agreement(s) in the form of:
International Swap and Derivatives Association, Inc 10 East 53rd Street, 9th Floor New York, 10022 New York USA Goteborg 16 October 2017 ISDA Master Agreements and ISDA Credit Support Documents: Enforceability
More information2. PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROCEDURAL REGULATION ARTICLE
RESPONSE TO THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION S CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO REGULATION 773/2004 AND THE NOTICES ON ACCESS TO THE FILE, LENIENCY, SETTLEMENTS AND COOPERATION WITH NATIONAL COURTS Freshfields
More informationConstruction & Engineering News
Construction & Engineering News Spring 2010 When will the Court pierce the adjudicator s veil? - Geoffrey Osborne Limited v Atkins Rail Limited [2009] (TCC) Enforcing the Oracle SG South Ltd v Swan Yard
More informationLegal Capacities of Statutory Bodies in Relation to Financial Dealings : The Hammersmith Decision
Bond Law Review Volume 2 Issue 1 Article 6 1990 Legal Capacities of Statutory Bodies in Relation to Financial Dealings : The Hammersmith Decision Anthony Hill Blake Dawson Waldron Follow this and additional
More informationJudge rules that a judgment creditor can take control of airplane even though wrong airport address was given to court on the Writ of Control
Judge rules that a judgment creditor can take control of airplane even though wrong airport address was given to court on the Writ of Control Midtown Acquisitions LLP v. Essar Global Fund Limited [2017]
More informationEvidence in International Arbitration. Expert Evidence / Expert Determination Clause. 莫世傑 / Danny Mok CILTHK 9 April 2017
Evidence in International Arbitration / Expert Determination Clause 莫世傑 / Danny Mok CILTHK 9 April 2017 1 Why necessary Finding of facts is the duty of the judge / arbitrator, but he or she should not
More informationGOODMAN HK FINANCE (Incorporated with limited liability in the Cayman Islands) Company Stock Code: 5763
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited and The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited take no responsibility for the contents of this announcement, make no representation as to its accuracy or completeness
More informationProportionality what has it done for us so far; what might it do to us next? Jonathan Swift QC
Proportionality what has it done for us so far; what might it do to us next? Jonathan Swift QC A. Introduction 1. This afternoon I will address two matters. First (and shortly) to try to identify some
More informationThe House of Lords looked at the perception of bias and whether such presence breached a defendant's right to fair trial.
The House of Lords in the case of Regina v Abdroikov, Green and Williamson, [2007] UKHL 37 [2007] 1 W.L.R. 2679, decided on 17 October 2007, examined the issue of jury composition, specifically considering
More informationCOSTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW. Richard Turney
COSTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW Richard Turney 1. The rules relating to the costs of judicial review are of practical and theoretical significance. In practical terms, they affect the decision of claimants to
More informationCriminal Liability Hong Kong s Auditors in the Firing Line
Accountants August 2012 Update Criminal Liability Hong Kong s Auditors in the Firing Line On 12 July 2012, the Companies Bill was passed by the Legislative Council marking a significant milestone in the
More informationRECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTES: EMPHASISING THE LAW OF CONTRACT. Tom Brennan 1. Barrister, 13 Wentworth Chambers
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTES: EMPHASISING THE LAW OF CONTRACT Tom Brennan 1 Barrister, 13 Wentworth Chambers Australian law has shifted from regulating the employer/employee relationship
More informationincluding existing and future fixtures, fittings, alterations and additions.
Version 2.3 Account No: Date: In this document: we, us and our means Fleet Mortgages Limited of 2 nd Floor, Flagship House, Reading Road North, Fleet, Hampshire, GU51 4WP (registered in England and Wales
More informationProperty. There is No Magic to a Statutory Declaration of Missing Title Deeds in Removing Risk of Encumbrance of a Property
Newsletter March 2015 Property There is No Magic to a Statutory Declaration of Missing Title Deeds in Removing Risk of Encumbrance of a Property Introduction In a property transaction, a vendor has the
More informationDisability Living Allowance. How to make a DLA appeal.
Disability Living Allowance How to make a DLA appeal www.dls.org.uk Disability Living Allowance How to make a DLA appeal Introduction There are 3 levels of appeal when appealing a decision by the Department
More informationEMIR PORTFOLIO RECONCILIATION, DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND DISCLOSURE. (2) (full legal name of company) (the Counterparty).
EMIR PORTFOLIO RECONCILIATION, DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND DISCLOSURE THIS AGREEMENT is dated as of [INSERT] and is made BETWEEN: (1) HSBC UK BANK PLC (HSBC); and (2) (full legal name of company) (the Counterparty).
More informationIn Site. Delivery of an adjudicator s decision what happens if it is not delivered in time?
Autumn 2010 Authors: Kevin Greene kevin.greene@klgates.com +44.(0)20.7360.8188 Inga K. Hall inga.hall@klgates.com +44.(0)20.7360.8137 Suzannah E. Boyd suzannah.boyd@klgates.com +44.(0)20.7360.8186 Lee
More informationBefore : The Honourable Mr Justice Popplewell Between :
Neutral Citation Number: 2015 EWHC 2542 (Comm) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT Case No: CL-2014-000070 Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London,
More informationUS securities law update.
US securities law update. In re Vivendi Universal, S.A. Securities Litigation - landmark decision for jurisdiction under the US securities laws, or just business as usual? The recent decision in In re
More informationVTB Capital - Supreme Court Decision
VTB Capital - Supreme Court Decision Publication - 17/07/2013 What are the legal consequences of "piercing the corporate veil" of a company? If it is appropriate to do so, will the controller of the company
More information2009 No (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES
S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2009 No. 1976 (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 Made - - - - 16th July 2009 Laid
More informationBefore : MR JUSTICE LEGGATT Between : LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES. - and
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Civ 3292 (QB) Case No: QB/2012/0301 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE KINGSTON COUNTY COURT HER HONOUR JUDGE JAKENS 2KT00203 Royal
More informationJurisdictional clauses: Exclusive or not? The example of the English Courts jurisdiction under the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement
149 Jurisdictional clauses: Exclusive or not? The example of the English Courts jurisdiction under the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement Dr Christian Oetiker and Dr Jana Essebier* Introduction In the aftermath
More informationForeign Exchange Transactions General Conditions
Foreign Exchange Transactions General Conditions The parties to this agreement are referred to herein as "we/us" (meaning the natural or juristic person, as may be applicable, who from time to time may
More informationWeekly Update A summary of recent developments in insurance, reinsurance and litigation law
Weekly Update A summary of recent developments in insurance, reinsurance and litigation law 12/10 CONTENTS Sylvia Shipping v Progress Bulk Carriers 2 A case on the test for remoteness of damages and whether
More informationBIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HONG KONG) LTD v ABDOOLALLY EBRAHIM & CO (HONG KONG) LTD - [1994] 3 HKC 518
1 BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HONG KONG) LTD v ABDOOLALLY EBRAHIM & CO (HONG KONG) LTD - [1994] 3 HKC 518 HIGH COURT KAPLAN J ACTION NO 11313 OF 1993 28 July 1994 Civil Procedure -- Summary judgment -- Lack
More informationCourt of Appeal rules that profit costs are due under CFA taken out whilst legal aid funding was in place
Court of Appeal rules that profit costs are due under CFA taken out whilst legal aid funding was in place Hyde v. Milton Keynes NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 399 Article by David Bowden Executive
More informationProper law of the arbitration agreement how does it fit. with the rest of the contract? Professor Phillip Capper
Proper law of the arbitration agreement how does it fit with the rest of the contract? BIICL Fifteenth Annual Review of the Arbitration Act 1996 19 April 2012 Professor Phillip Capper What is the Issue?
More informationNFA Arbitration: Resolving Customer Disputes
NFA Arbitration: Resolving Customer Disputes Contents Why arbitration? 2 What does it cost to arbitrate? 4 What is NFA Arbitration? 6 Glossary of terms 17 National Futures Association (NFA) is a self-regulatory
More informationSabah Shipyard (Pakistan) Ltd v Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan
184 SINGAPORE LAW REPORTS (REISSUE) [2004] 3 SLR(R) Sabah Shipyard (Pakistan) Ltd v Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan [2004] SGHC 109 High Court Originating Motion No 31 of 2003 Judith Prakash
More informationNOTICES, TIME BARS AND PROPORTIONALITY
NOTICES, TIME BARS AND PROPORTIONALITY A talk by Sir Rupert Jackson to the Hong Kong Society of Construction Law on 21 st September 2018 CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Notice provisions 3. A conundrum 4.
More informationNo Safe Harbor in a Bankruptcy Storm: Mutuality Baked Into the Very Definition of Setoff. July/August Mark G. Douglas
No Safe Harbor in a Bankruptcy Storm: Mutuality Baked Into the Very Definition of Setoff July/August 2010 Mark G. Douglas Safe harbors in the Bankruptcy Code designed to insulate nondebtor parties to financial
More informationSingapore International Commercial Court issues first decision. A Legal Update from Dechert's International Arbitration Group
Singapore International Commercial Court issues first decision A Legal Update from Dechert's International Arbitration Group June 2016 Following the establishment of the Singapore International Commercial
More informationNotice of Annual General Meeting of GlobalData plc
Notice of Annual General Meeting of GlobalData plc (incorporated and registered in England and Wales with company registration number 3925319) Meeting 12.00 noon 25 April 2017 NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL
More informationIP & IT Bytes. November Patents: jurisdiction and declaratory relief
November 2016 IP & IT Bytes First published in the November 2016 issue of PLC Magazine and reproduced with the kind permission of the publishers. Subscription enquiries 020 7202 1200. Patents: jurisdiction
More information2. The terms of the particular Transaction to which this Confirmation relates are as follows:
Execution Copy Admin No: 07MU02597 July 26, 2007 FOURTH AMENDED AND RESTATED TRANSACTION (Amended and Restated as of January 30, 2008, March 26, 2008, April 8, 2008 and December 14, 2012) Airport Commission
More informationHong Kong International Arbitration Centre ADJUDICATION RULES
Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre ADJUDICATION RULES Table of Contents Contents Page No. 1. Introductory Notes. P.3 2. Section I Object and Administration of Adjudication.. P.4 3. Section II The
More informationLITIGATION PRIVILEGE THE DOMINANT PURPOSE TEST- THE POST- ENRC LANDSCAPE.
LITIGATION PRIVILEGE THE DOMINANT PURPOSE TEST- THE POST- ENRC LANDSCAPE. The Court of Appeal is to consider the ENRC 1 judgment later this year. In that case Andrew J held that an investigation into possible
More informationBefore: MR RECORDER BERKLEY MISS EASHA MAGON. and ROYAL & SUN ALLIANCE INSURANCE PLC
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CENTRAL LONDON Case No: B53Y J995 Court No. 60 Thomas More Building Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Friday, 26 th February 2016 Before: MR RECORDER BERKLEY B E T W
More informationPRACTISING RULES COSTS LAWYERS. Regulator: Costs Lawyer Standards Board. Effective date: 9 April 2014
PRACTISING RULES COSTS LAWYERS Regulator: Costs Lawyer Standards Board Effective date: 9 April 2014 Introduction These Rules ( Rules ) were made pursuant to the Legal Services Act 2007 ( LSA ). On the
More informationPAY NOW, ARBITRATE LATER?
BRIEFING PAY NOW, ARBITRATE LATER? OCTOBER 2018 ENGLISH HIGH COURT HOLDS THAT ONLY MATTERS THAT GO DIRECTLY TO ENFORCEABILITY OF ADJUDICATOR S DECISION WILL FALL WITHIN ARBITRATION AGREEMENT EXCEPTION
More informationIMMIGRATION. Pricing Information
IMMIGRATION Pricing Information This document sets out the pricing guidance for initial UK immigration applications. Please note that the Firm does not offer advice about asylum applications. Immigration
More informationUK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
C RIO TINTO PLC AND RIO TINTO LIMITED UK PURCHASE AGREEMENT LINKLATERS One Silk Street London EC2Y 8HQ Telephone: (44-20) 7456 2000 Facsimile: (44-20) 7456 2222 Ref: JAGI/NZH This Agreement is made on
More informationThe Pinsent Masons Planning Toolkit Series
Update April 2008 The Pinsent Masons Planning Toolkit Series Part 2 - Getting on Site Minor modifications, reserved matters and lawful commencement of development Minor Modifications The Current Position
More informationView Esteem Sdn Bhd v Bina Puri Holdings Bhd*
CIDB Construction Law Report 2016 View Esteem Sdn Bhd v Bina Puri Holdings Bhd* COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA CIVIL APPEAL NO: W 02(C)(A) 1507 09/2015 HAMID SULTAN BIN ABU BACKER JCA, PRASAD SANDOSHAM ABRAHAM
More informationHas a Governmental Intervention Credit Event occurred with respect to Novo Banco SA on or about 29 December 2015?
Novo Banco External Review Decision and Analysis of the External Review Panel of the ISDA EMEA Determinations Committee with respect to DC issue Number 2015123002 pursuant to Section 4 of the 2016 ISDA
More informationTHE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CONTRACTUAL DECISION MAKING: IMPLICATIONS OF BRAGANZA FOR PROPERTY LAWYERS. Landmark Chambers
THE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CONTRACTUAL DECISION MAKING: IMPLICATIONS OF BRAGANZA FOR PROPERTY LAWYERS Tom Weekes QC Landmark Chambers November 2016 1. Over the past couple of decades, an important issue has
More informationARBITRATION RULES OF THE SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE SIAC RULES (5 TH EDITION, 1 APRIL 2013)
ARBITRATION RULES OF THE SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE SIAC RULES (5 TH EDITION, 1 APRIL 2013) 1. Scope of Application and Interpretation 1.1 Where parties have agreed to refer their disputes
More informationCorporate and commercial disputes review
Financial institutions Energy Infrastructure, mining and commodities Transport Technology and innovation Life sciences and healthcare Corporate and commercial disputes review Issue 05 July 2017 In this
More information2018 ISDA Choice of Court and Governing Law Guide
2018 ISDA Choice of Court and Governing Law Guide International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. Copyright 2018 by International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. 10 E 53 rd Street 9th Floor
More informationJUDGMENT. Rolle Family and Company Limited (Appellant) v Rolle (Respondent) (Bahamas)
Michaelmas Term [2017] UKPC 35 Privy Council Appeal No 0095 of 2015 JUDGMENT Rolle Family and Company Limited (Appellant) v Rolle (Respondent) (Bahamas) From the Court of Appeal of the Commonwealth of
More informationEXECUTION STANDARD TERMS FOR CLIENT CLEARING
EXECUTION STANDARD TERMS FOR CLIENT CLEARING Background and Purpose (A) (B) These provisions are the Execution Standard Terms, as published by LCH.Clearnet Limited ( LCH ). In order to facilitate the entry
More informationISDA. International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. CREDIT SUPPORT DEED. between. ...and... made on relating to the
(Bilateral Form - Security Interest) 1 (ISDA Agreements Subject to English Law) 2 ISDA International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. CREDIT SUPPORT DEED between...and... ( Party A ) ( Party B )
More informationNigerian National Petroleum Corporation v IPCO (Nigeria) Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 10/21
CA on appeal from QBD (Mr Justice Tomlinson) before Tuckey LJ; Wall LJ; Rimer LJ. 21 st October 2008. Lord Justice Tuckey: 1. Can part of a New York Convention arbitration award be enforced? How should
More informationSea of Change Regulatory reforms charting a new course. FOA Clearing Module Training Event 18 October 2013
Sea of Change Regulatory reforms charting a new course FOA Clearing Module Training Event 18 October 2013 Agenda Agenda Introduction and overview The architecture t of the FOA Documentation ti Library
More informationNo Appeal Against High Court Ruling That Notes of Interviews Conducted by Lawyers Are Not Covered by Legal Advice Privilege
CLIENT MEMORANDUM No Appeal Against High Court Ruling That Notes of Interviews Conducted by Lawyers Are Not Covered by Legal Advice Privilege February 13, 2017 AUTHORS Peter Burrell Paul Feldberg A. Introduction
More informationTHIS DOCUMENT IS IMPORTANT AND REQUIRES YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION.
THIS DOCUMENT IS IMPORTANT AND REQUIRES YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. If you are in any doubt as to any aspects of the proposals referred to in this document or as to the action you should take, you should
More informationCredit Suisse Group Finance (Guernsey) Limited
THIS NOTICE IS IMPORTANT AND REQUIRES THE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION OF 2019 BONDHOLDERS. IF 2019 BONDHOLDERS ARE IN ANY DOUBT AS TO THE ACTION THEY SHOULD TAKE, THEY SHOULD SEEK THEIR OWN FINANCIAL AND LEGAL
More informationAvoiding jurisdictional disasters: How will the updated EU Jurisdiction Rules impact your dispute resolution strategy?
Dispute resolution October 2015 Update Avoiding jurisdictional disasters: How will the updated EU Jurisdiction Rules impact your dispute resolution strategy? The UK continues to retain its position as
More informationAPPENDIX FOR MARGIN ACCOUNTS
APPENDIX FOR MARGIN ACCOUNTS This Appendix applies if the Client opens or maintains a Margin Account in respect of margin facilities for trading in Securities. Unless otherwise defined in this Appendix,
More information(company number 2065) - and - (company number SC )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE NO: OF 2011 CHANCERY DIVISION COMPANIES COURT LLOYDS TSB BANK PLC (company number 2065) - and - BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC (company number SC 327000) SCHEME for the transfer of part
More informationProcurement Challenges. Tactics and Lessons Learnt from Recent Developments 6 December 2016 Jennifer Robinson
Procurement Challenges Tactics and Lessons Learnt from Recent Developments 6 December 2016 Jennifer Robinson Procurement Challenges Quick refresh on procurement law on challenges The Energysolutions v
More informationREMOTENESS OF CONTRACTUAL DAMAGES
The Denning Law Journal Vol 21 2009 pp 173-179 CASE COMMENTARY REMOTENESS OF CONTRACTUAL DAMAGES Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas ) [2008] 2 Lloyd's Rep 275 John Halladay
More informationFreight Investor Solutions DMCC Terms of Business
Freight Investor Solutions DMCC Terms of Business 1. COMMENCEMENT 1.1 The term Agreement hereunder shall mean collectively these Terms of Business ( Terms ), and Freight Investor Solutions DMCC Order Execution
More informationGalliford Try Construction Ltd v Mott MacDonald Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/14
JUDGMENT : Mr Justice Coulson : TCC. 14 th March 2008 Introduction 1. This is an application by the Defendant for an order that paragraphs 39 to 48 inclusive of the witness statement of Mr Joseph Martin,
More information"HOME IS WHERE THE HEART IS" DOMICILE, JURISDICTION, AND ANCHOR DEFENDANTS
BRIEFING "HOME IS WHERE THE HEART IS" DOMICILE, JURISDICTION, AND ANCHOR DEFENDANTS SEPTEMBER 2017 WHAT WILL THE ENGLISH COURTS APPROACH BE TO DETERMINING WHETHER A DEFENDANT IS DOMICILED IN THE JURISDICTION?
More informationLLB358 Admin Law. Governs the process of Government protects us from mistakes of the Government
LLB358 Admin Law Answering a Problem Question In two sentences address what happened, who did it, how they did (e.g. source of power) and what does the person want? Explain the law and apply them to the
More informationDANGERS OF NOT OBSERVING THE LCIA ARBITRATION RULES
BRIEFING DANGERS OF NOT OBSERVING THE LCIA ARBITRATION RULES MARCH 2018 ENGLISH HIGH COURT FINDS REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION FOR DISPUTES UNDER TWO SEPARATE CONTRACTS INVALID ALSO GIVES USEFUL GUIDANCE ON
More informationFor personal use only
amaysim Australia July 2015 Master amaysim ESP Rules 25.5.12 Contents 1. Purpose... 1 2. Definitions... 1 3. Offer to Participate and Acceptance... 5 4. Vesting of Share Rights... 6 5. Liquidity Event...
More informationIN THE MATTER OF MAGISTERIAL SUIT NO. 66 OF 2008 AND IN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT 2000 PART 56.
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES HIGH COURT CIVIL CLAIM NO. 320 OF 2011 IN THE MATTER OF MAGISTERIAL SUIT NO. 66 OF 2008 AND IN THE EASTERN
More informationConstruction Contracts: No implied obligation to get on with it
BuildLaw - Issue 13 - No Implied Obligation to get on with it 1 Construction Contracts: No implied obligation to get on with it An issue that regularly crops-up in practice, but rarely before the courts,
More informationBefore: THE SENIOR PRESIDENT OF TRIBUNALS LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 16 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM The Divisional Court Sales LJ, Whipple J and Garnham J CB/3/37-38 Before: Case No: C1/2017/3068 Royal
More informationWhy did the MF/1 terms not apply? The judge had concluded that the MF/1 terms did not apply because:
United Kingdom Letters of intent and contract formation RTS Flexible Systems Limited (Respondents) v Molkerei Alois Muller Gmbh & Company KG (UK Production) (Appellants) [2010] UKSC 14C Chris Hill and
More informationMott MacDonald Ltd v London & Regional Properties Ltd [2007] Adj.L.R. 05/23
JUDGMENT : HHJ Anthony Thornton QC. TCC. 23 rd May 2007 1. Introduction 1. The claimant, Mott MacDonald Ltd ( MM ) is a specialist engineering multi-disciplinary consultancy providing services to the construction
More information