Collateral and credit support

This Overview is a guide to the Banking & Finance content within the Collateral and credit support subtopic, with links to appropriate materials.

Financial derivative transactions contain a number of risks, two of which are common to most forms of transactions. The first risk is that the other party will not pay what is due, or otherwise perform its obligations. In a worst case scenario, this would be due to that party’s insolvency. The second risk occurs in financial derivative transactions that provide for regular payment dates during the life of the transaction but in the periods between those payment dates, amounts are due but not payable until that date: this creates a credit exposure with a risk that the insolvency of one party before the next payment date means that the other party cannot recover what was due to it for that period.

As with other forms of credit risk, the exposed party will look to the other party to provide an acceptable form of security in order to remove or reduce that risk. This is common where one party may have a stronger credit status

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Banking & Finance News

High Court clarifies position of sole directors under Model Articles and the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and in-court appointment of administrators (Re KRF Services (UK) Ltd and others)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This High Court case (which addresses two important issues in UK company law and sanctions regulations) will be of interest to insolvency practitioners, corporate and restructuring lawyers, sanctions lawyers, and businesses and individuals which are affected by sanctions. Firstly, it clarifies the position of sole directors under the Model Articles for private limited companies. The court ruled that a sole director can validly pass board resolutions and bind the company, regardless of whether they have always been the sole director or were previously part of a multi-member board. This interpretation resolves conflicts between Article 7(2) and Article 11(2) of the Model Articles, with the court favouring Article 7(2)'s provisions. Secondly, the case examines the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and the in-court appointment of administrators. The court determined that making an administration application and order does not breach asset-freezing sanctions, even when the company is designated or controlled by a sanctioned person. While an Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) license is typically required for administrators to act, the court retains discretion to make immediate appointments in urgent situations. Written by Joshua Ray and Duncan Henderson, partners at CANDEY, which acted for the First and Second Applicants on this matter.

View Banking & Finance by content type :

Popular documents