Search a title or topic

Over 20 million podcasts, powered by 

Player FM logo
Artwork

Content provided by Clauses & Controversies, Mitu Gulati, and Mark Weidemaier. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Clauses & Controversies, Mitu Gulati, and Mark Weidemaier or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

Ep 146 ft. Mitu & Mark

37:08
 
Share
 

Manage episode 448458064 series 2911580
Content provided by Clauses & Controversies, Mitu Gulati, and Mark Weidemaier. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Clauses & Controversies, Mitu Gulati, and Mark Weidemaier or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
The Penalty Doctrine in Contract Law We've never been fans of the contract law rule against penalties. Why can't parties (sophisticated ones at least) agree to suffer a penalty in the event of breach? We’d ordinarily avoid this topic, because the doctrine makes little sense and the issue doesn’t come up much in the sovereign debt world. But recently, a couple of sovereign restructurings (Ghana and Zambia) have used “Loss Reinstatement Provisions.” At least on their face, these provisions seem vulnerable to challenge under the penalty doctrine, since, if the sovereign defaults on the restructured deal, they impose a loss that seems untethered to the injury creditors have suffered. Would these new clauses be enforced if challenged? The contracts in question are both under English law, which we don't know much about. But that does not stop us from speculating and arguing. Producer: Leanna Doty
  continue reading

160 episodes

Artwork

Ep 146 ft. Mitu & Mark

Clauses & Controversies

21 subscribers

published

iconShare
 
Manage episode 448458064 series 2911580
Content provided by Clauses & Controversies, Mitu Gulati, and Mark Weidemaier. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Clauses & Controversies, Mitu Gulati, and Mark Weidemaier or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
The Penalty Doctrine in Contract Law We've never been fans of the contract law rule against penalties. Why can't parties (sophisticated ones at least) agree to suffer a penalty in the event of breach? We’d ordinarily avoid this topic, because the doctrine makes little sense and the issue doesn’t come up much in the sovereign debt world. But recently, a couple of sovereign restructurings (Ghana and Zambia) have used “Loss Reinstatement Provisions.” At least on their face, these provisions seem vulnerable to challenge under the penalty doctrine, since, if the sovereign defaults on the restructured deal, they impose a loss that seems untethered to the injury creditors have suffered. Would these new clauses be enforced if challenged? The contracts in question are both under English law, which we don't know much about. But that does not stop us from speculating and arguing. Producer: Leanna Doty
  continue reading

160 episodes

Semua episod

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Copyright 2025 | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | | Copyright
Listen to this show while you explore
Play