some encouraging news

Found an article this afternoon that some of you may be interested in:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23716048/Reed-Smith-Metavante

It primarily discusses the Metavante case BUT on page 5;

"Lehman Brothers Commercial Corporation v. Norton Gold Fields Ltd. - Lehman's motion to compel payments by Australian counterparty due pursuant to a non-terminated gold price swap agreement under the 2002 version of the ISDA Master Agreement, this dispute is notable as the first such disputed transaction governed by English law; further, in addition to relying upon 2(a)(iii) to excuse its settlement payments, Norton argues that LBCC has failed to issue any additional confirmations since September 12, 2008 and, although the confirmations at issue indicate that transactions are cash-settled, Norton contends that LBCC repudiated the agreement (a separate event of default) by failing to make "gold pre-deliveries for settlement"; in response, Lehman relies heavily on Metavante and the relief requested includes enforcement of the automatic stay."

Certainly adds strength to Norton's case, I think Lehman will indeed have to "rely heavily" on the Metavante case, although the article goes on to explain that the Bankruptcy Courts have left alot of the facts of that case open to future interpretation.