So Much For The Sanctity Of Institutions

[maw]

"A contract will be considered illegal at its formation when it is incapable of performance without an illegal act. Contracts falling into this category cannot be enforced. Where a contract is illegal when formed, neither party will acquire rights under that contract, regardless of whether there was any intention to break the law. The contract will be void and treated as if it was never entered into."

Please remember that my argument was based on the fact that they did find him guilty of an illegal act.

I was told to brush up on my law books. I'm still waiting for a counter argument - based on either case law of the uniform commercial code - not on a story about a bank trader in Singapore and his clients that made out like bandits.

 

[Pensador]

Bull Market?? No bulls offered in the Liniers Market, Cattle breeders are not selling Bulls , prices climb sharply?? Bulls are capital investment.

I would be holding my bulls too for a few months at least until the dust settles. But what I am really curious about is.... Will we get real economic data in the near future? If so, well you might want to fasten your seat belts.

 

[Rich One]

"A contract will be considered illegal at its formation when it is incapable of performance without an illegal act. Contracts falling into this category cannot be enforced. Where a contract is illegal when formed, neither party will acquire rights under that contract, regardless of whether there was any intention to break the law. The contract will be void and treated as if it was never entered into."

Please remember that my argument was based on the fact that they did find him guilty of an illegal act.

I was told to brush up on my law books. I'm still waiting for a counter argument - based on either case law of the uniform commercial code - not on a story about a bank trader in Singapore and his clients that made out like bandits.

I don't dispute your legal savvy but the Bank Trader in Singapore is no fisherman's Story...!! Nick Leeson did illegal tradings and brought Barrings Bank to its knees.


http://www.theguardi...1995-20-archive

Barings collapse at 20: How rogue trader Nick Leeson broke the bank

[font=Guardian Egyptian Web']
Twenty years ago, Nick Leeson caused the collapse of Barings, the City’s oldest merchant bank and banker to the Queen [/font]


[font=Guardian Text Egyptian Web']Leeson did make Barings vast sums. In 1993, he made £10m - 10% of the bank’s profits for that year. But in 1995, the discovery of a secret file - Error Account 88888 - showed that Leeson had gambled away £827m in Barings’s name.[/font]
[font=Guardian Text Egyptian Web']The City’s oldest merchant bank was finished.[/font]

 

[Bajo_cero2]

The third option is to not devalue, which the reason why Vanoli and Co. sold the contracts in the first place.

But it looks like we're back to "persuading" (i.e. threatening) companies and banks to accept losses, not paying debt obligations, and not upholding the be-all-and-end-all importance of "seguridad jurídica."

Oh, the irony.

True.
Don't forget the billions of pesos on loans of PROCREAR housing in pesos. They are going to be lost if they devaluate.

Also, the AFIP tax collection is in pesos.

 

[dennisr]

This is how it works in the real world to break a trade/futures contract. It is not about laws. It is how exchanges work.
All that is required to break a trade or rescind a future contracts is to show the transaction deviates so much from the current market price that it is considered wrong. These trades are halted, or broken, because they do not reflect the true price of the security and they can influence or cause erroneous trades on other stocks or exchanges.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

This is how it works in the real world to break a trade/futures contract. It is not about laws. It is how exchanges work.
All that is required to break a trade or rescind a future contracts is to show the transaction deviates so much from the current market price that it is considered wrong. These trades are halted, or broken, because they do reflect the true price of the security and they can influence or cause erroneous trades on other stocks or exchanges.

If you want to break a contract, then it is all about law. Read the CC.

 

[dennisr]

If you want to break a contract, then it is all about law. Read the CC.

You have no idea how little I care what you think or say.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

You have no idea how little I care what you think or say.

This is because the speach of happiness is better than reality. You cannot break contracts without paying terrific compensations unless you make a coup, you remove all judges and then you can deny justice with impunity BUT the new officialism seems to do not understand that they barely won the Presidency at elections.

 

[scotttswan]

This is because the speach of happiness is better than reality. You cannot break contracts without paying terrific compensations unless you make a coup, you remove all judges and then you can deny justice with impunity BUT the new officialism seems to do not understand that they barely won the Presidency at elections.

unless the contract was illegal.

 

[sesamosinsal]

This is how it works in the real world to break a trade/futures contract. It is not about laws. It is how exchanges work.
All that is required to break a trade or rescind a future contracts is to show the transaction deviates so much from the current market price that it is considered wrong. These trades are halted, or broken, because they do not reflect the true price of the security and they can influence or cause erroneous trades on other stocks or exchanges.

This is not how exchanges work. If liquidity dries up, you are going to get the next available price. Read up on what happened when the Swiss National Bank stopped defending its EURCHF peg several months ago. Many traders and brokers lost their shirts. FXCM, a publicly traded company and FX broker in the US, almost had to declare bankreuptcy. Other brokers, such as Alpari, did go under, and none of the resulting lawsuits have been dismissed because the client traded an asset (in this case a national currency just like the ARS) that was mispriced or manipulated (as indeed the CHF was).