Legal clouds hang over RWA-driven netting push

New capital requirements are making it more difficult for banks to trade with counterparties that are not covered by a netting opinion. That is spurring attempts to expand coverage, but can leave banks and lawyers on uncertain ground. By Lukas Becker


At first glance, there is not much to unite Azerbaijani oil companies, French covered bond vehicles and the Church of England Pensions Board. Actually, there isn’t much to unite them at second glance either – but what they share is the fact that they have all recently been the subject of a push by banks to obtain netting opinions for individual derivatives users, or classes of user.

This is not new behaviour – there have always been certain counterparties that are not covered by the country

Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.

To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact or view our subscription options here:

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to View our subscription options

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here