Has Greece Caused a Credit Event?
David M. Lindley
Supreme Court Limits Reach of Alien Tort Statute, But Some Questions Are Unresolved
Authors: David M. Lindley, Greg T. Lembrich, Ranah L. Esmaili
On April 18, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously affirmed a Second Circuit decision dismissing the tort claims of Nigerian nationals against international oil companies for alleged complicity with the Nigerian Government in committing human rights abuses during the 1990s. The majority decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Company, et al. applied the presumption against extraterritorial application to the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”) to bar claims seeking relief for alleged violations of international law occurring outside the United States, but left crucial questions regarding corporate liability unresolved.
Has Greece Caused a Credit Event?
Source: This article originally appeared in the August 3, 2010, issue of IFLR
Authors: David M. Lindley, Edward Flanders
The recent financial travails of Greece raise three interesting questions: First, has the country's conduct so far constituted a credit event and, in particular, will any of the steps Greece has taken in response to the demands of the situation be found to constitute a credit event? Second, even if no credit event has occurred yet, will Greece be able to avoid restructuring its debt if it fails to satisfy the conditions precedent to its receipt of EU and IMF support? (Whatever waivers the political process might provide to Greece, it seems unlikely that those who bought protection will be satisfied with politically desired social peace.) Lastly, will the decline of Greece's financial rating to junk status create rights for protection buyers even if such a decline is not a credit event?
Regulators and Market Participants Target Future Regulation of Credit Default Swaps
Authors: Edward Flanders, William C. F. Kurz, David M. Lindley, Jeffrey R. Zuckerman, James Wheaton
Over the past several weeks, U.S. and U.K. regulators and various market participants have made several potentially significant statements regarding the possible future regulation of credit default swaps (“CDS”). The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (the “Federal Reserve”), the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets (“PWG”), and the New York Insurance Department (“NYID”) in the U.S., the U.K. Financial Services Authority (“FSA”) in the U.K., as well as a group of eight major CDS dealers (the “Dealers”), have all expressed concerns about CDS, their regulation and the availability of information about the CDS market.
Manhattan Federal Court Enforces ‘Clear’ Terms of Credit Default Swap Contract
Authors: David M. Lindley, Edward Flanders, William C. F. Kurz, Rick B. Antonoff, James Wheaton
Lawsuit Challenges Termination of Insured Credit Default Swaps
Authors: William C. F. Kurz, David M. Lindley, Ernest Patrikis, Rick B. Antonoff
In a lawsuit filed in New York federal court on March 19, 2008, Merrill Lynch International (“MLI”), an affiliate of the investment banking firm Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc., alleges that bond insurer XL Capital Assurance Inc. (“XL”) wrongfully terminated a series of insured credit default swap agreements based on XL’s claim that MLI repudiated the agreements by assigning voting rights with respect to the insured reference securities to a third party. MLI commenced the lawsuit to obtain a declaratory judgment that the swap agreements remain binding and enforceable against XL and that MLI did not repudiate them. In effect, MLI seeks a ruling that XL’s purported terminations are invalid.
Narrow Construction of New York Statute Results in Limitation of Rights Automatically Transferred to Purchaser of Security
Authors: Bruce A. Ericson, David M. Lindley
Bulletin 03-07, Second Circuit Limits Retroactive Application Of Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Authors: David M. Lindley, David, Crichlow, Jessica E. Habib