www.isda.org/2018/01/08/brexit-and-the-isda-master-agreement/  www.isda.org/2018/01/08/brexit-and-the-isda-master-agreement/  Article 10 of the 2001/24/EC Directive on the Restructuring and Liquidation of Credit Institutions; Article 273 of the European Parliament and Council Directive 2009/138/EC of 25 November 2009 on access to the insurance and reinsurance activity and its exercise (Solvency II) (redesign).  Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and the Council of 20 May 2015 relating to insolvency procedures (redesign).  Article 1st of the Regulation (EC) 593/2008 of the European Parliament and the Council of 17 June 2008 relating to the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I).  Except in limited cases where binding rules of application apply in a Member State.  European Parliament and Council 2014/59/EU Directive of 15 May 2014 setting out a framework for redressing and resolving the failures of credit institutions and investment firms.  For more details on brrd, see: www.shearman.com/~/media/Files/NewsInsights/Publications/2016/02/BRRD-Contractual-Recognition-of-Bailin-and-Resolution-Stays-FIAFR-022216.pdf English and New York laws subject to ISDA masteragrements have long been the preferred framework agreements for OTC derivatives transactions. According to the ISDA, “virtually all” ISDA master contracts between counterparties established in the EU or the European Economic Area are subject to English law.  The judgment of the Court of Appeal in BNP Paribas SA/Trattamento Rifiuti Metropolitani SPA offers other assurances that jurisdiction clauses in the standard form of ISDA documentation will not be easily superseded by contrary jurisdiction clauses in related contracts. The Court of Appeal implemented an English jurisdiction clause in an ISDA master contract concerning a clearly competing Italian jurisdiction clause in a related financing agreement, although the timing of the ISDA master contract provides that the funding agreement would be a priority in the event of a conflict.
The Court of Commerce`s first instance decision has been upheld (see our E-Bulletin on Banking Disputes). Before considering the various negative statements requested by the bank, the Tribunal ruled on a question relating to the contractual interpretation of the standard comprehensive contractual clause, which is contained in the ISDA`s governing contract.