| dc.contributor | 法學院 | zh_Tw |
| dc.creator (作者) | 臧正運 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator (作者) | Tsang, Cheng-Yun | en_US |
| dc.date (日期) | 2015-04 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 21-Mar-2018 17:31:20 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 21-Mar-2018 17:31:20 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 21-Mar-2018 17:31:20 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/116392 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | As the first copycat litigation of NML Capital v. Argentina, the case of Export-Import Bank of the Republic of China v. Grenada ("Ex-Im Bank v. Grenada") has implications for the future direction of sovereign debt restructurings. It not only complicates the already muddy pari passu saga by involving official lenders and judgment debts but also potentially exacerbates the holdout problem by marching into a whole new battle over the negative pledge clause. This article offers an analysis of the case, and draws out its policy and practical implications. | en_US |
| dc.format.extent | 374836 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | Capital Markets Law Journal, Vol.10, No.2, pp.142-161 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | sovereign debt, pari passu, negative pledge, restructuring, holdout, NML v. Argentina | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | Ex-Im Bank v Grenada: Adding Clarity or Confusion? | zh_TW |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
| dc.identifier.doi (DOI) | 10.1093/cmlj/kmv022 | |
| dc.doi.uri (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.1093/cmlj/kmv022 | |
