A common interest in common law
Losing UK court judgement recognition in EU would not dim enthusiasm for English law contracts
Brexit negotiators have expressed frustration at the slow pace of progress, but both sides agree on the need to avoid legal uncertainty.
The UK and the other 27 European Union countries have issued position papers expressing a desire to maintain mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgements after Brexit. At the moment, this is guaranteed under the Brussels 1 Regulation for EU countries, plus the Lugano Convention which extends the arrangement to Switzerland, Norway and Iceland.
“The consensus seems to be that everyone likes English law. They know how it works, they like London as a litigation forum and they like the freedom of contract English law provides,” says James Greig, a partner at White & Case.
Despite this common ground, however, nothing is agreed in the Brexit negotiations until everything is agreed. What if no deal is reached, or negotiations are still ongoing when the Article 50 deadline expires in March 2019? For derivatives trades extending beyond that date, this raises questions about the use of English courts as the jurisdiction to resolve disputes.
Almost all swaps, repo and securities lending transactions in the European Economic Area – and 85% of derivatives contracts worldwide – are currently governed by English law contracts positing English courts as the enforcing jurisdiction, according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association.
There are already precedents for enforcing third-country judgements in the EU. The remaining 15% of derivatives contracts worldwide use New York law, and US judgements involving European counterparties have to be enforced in the EU. If no transition or deal is reached by March 2019, English law contracts that specify English court jurisdiction would be in the same boat.
“Absent an agreement post-Brexit, English law will become a third-country law after the UK exits the EU. An English court judgement will therefore not be automatically recognised in EU countries, which will add to the red tape for counterparties – firms trying to enforce an English court judgement would likely need to make a petition to the local jurisdiction court. Isda is working with members to consider the impact and how this issue can be addressed,” says Peter Werner, a senior director at Isda.
There is an antipathy expressed by derivatives lawyers of the risk of bringing into a derivatives contract all the panoply of European civil code law, which happens if you adopt, for example, French law as the governing law of your contract
James Greig, White & Case
For derivatives trades written after a no-deal Brexit, one option would be to adopt the law of an EU 27 jurisdiction, with courts designated in that jurisdiction for dispute resolution. But market consensus seems to be against this approach, because derivatives contracts could no longer make use of the UK’s flexible common law system, which is based on precedent rather than a fixed written constitution.
“There is an antipathy expressed by derivatives lawyers of the risk of bringing into a derivatives contract all the panoply of European civil code law, which happens if you adopt, for example, French law as the governing law of your contract,” says Greig.
There could be transitional problems for the market if many legacy contracts are still operating under English law, warns one hedging adviser. A dealer – or even an individual client – could end up with a portfolio of contracts operating under different legal regimes and court jurisdictions.
“If there is a default or an exchange of collateral or any specific legal action that has to be taken with respect to the whole portfolio of a certain investor, it will be extremely complicated to deal with it from a legal perspective – especially if the new jurisdiction has different bankruptcy laws from the UK with respect to collateral, for example,” says the adviser.
This perhaps explains why the French finance minister earlier suggested the radical idea of trying to set up a dedicated English law court in France, conducting proceedings in English with judges experienced in common law application. Even if English courts do not retain European primacy after Brexit, it seems English law will remain the lingua franca for derivatives contracts.
コンテンツを印刷またはコピーできるのは、有料の購読契約を結んでいるユーザー、または法人購読契約の一員であるユーザーのみです。
これらのオプションやその他の購読特典を利用するには、info@risk.net にお問い合わせいただくか、こちらの購読オプションをご覧ください: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
現在、このコンテンツを印刷することはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。
現在、このコンテンツをコピーすることはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。
Copyright インフォプロ・デジタル・リミテッド.無断複写・転載を禁じます。
当社の利用規約、https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/(ポイント2.4)に記載されているように、印刷は1部のみです。
追加の権利を購入したい場合は、info@risk.netまで電子メールでご連絡ください。
Copyright インフォプロ・デジタル・リミテッド.無断複写・転載を禁じます。
このコンテンツは、当社の記事ツールを使用して共有することができます。当社の利用規約、https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/(第2.4項)に概説されているように、認定ユーザーは、個人的な使用のために資料のコピーを1部のみ作成することができます。また、2.5項の制限にも従わなければなりません。
追加権利の購入をご希望の場合は、info@risk.netまで電子メールでご連絡ください。
詳細はこちら 我々の見解
批判派は、パーペチュアルはすべてフロスだと言っています。しかし、数字はそうではないことを示唆している
TradFiを原資産とする永久先物に対する堅調な未決済建玉は、CMEやEurexといった既存の取引所にとって脅威となる可能性があります
SpaceXがCMEの個別銘柄先物に待望の追い風をもたらした
S&P 500先物契約へのIPO関連の追加契約として、新たな契約が急増する可能性があります
Bank vs non-bank: FX’s two-tier reality
CME and LSEG data show banks provide sticky and broad liquidity, while non-banks cling tightly to the price
規制当局はエンフォースメントを甘くしているのか?(そして、私たちはそれを気にするべきなのか?)
米国の規制当局は、技術的な規則違反に対する罰則を緩和しており、小さくとも重要なリスクが見過ごされてしまうのではないかという懸念が高まっています
FX HedgePoolを超えて:オール・トゥ・オール(All-to-All)の今後はどうなる?
この取引モデルの支持者たちは、その将来性を明るく見ていますが、普及に向けた障壁は依然として残っています。
バーゼル協定のCVA見直し:米国では説得力があるものの、欧州ではそれほどではない
信用リスクモデルの使用禁止は、米国の銀行がより高度なCVA手法を採用するきっかけとなる可能性があります
オルタナティブ・データは予測市場に賭けているのか?
新たなデータの豊富な情報源を提供する一方で、法的な不確実性は依然として残っています
「SaaSpocalypse」は、プライベート市場にリスクモデルが必要であることを示している
投資家たちは、プライベート・クレジットにおける損失がどれほど深刻なものになるか、ほとんど見当がつかない