Richard: In the US we have changed our swap agreement forms to provide for arbitration in order to avoid having to explain the intricacies of derivatives trading to judges or, God forbid, juries. In Canada we are continuing to submit to the jurisdiction of Canadian courts (on the theory that there are no juries in civil actions and arbitration is rarely used in Canadian contracts generally). As we are presently in the process of revising our UK swap agreement forms, I guess it's time to revisit the issue as it applies to UK agreements. Currently we agree to UK law and the jurisdiction of UK courts (where there are no juries in civil actions). Should this continue to be our policy or should we begin going for arbitration in the UK contracts also? I would ask Paul and Scott to let Richard and me know if arbitration is widely enough used in UK agreements that we can get away with asking for it. Thanks,
Answer: UK Courts vs. Arbitration for UK Swap Agreements
Here is an email: Friends... Chris Bartlett at Harvard presented (last week) the 2 most recent Enron cases he wrote to the "Harvard Program for Global Leadership". This is an Exec Ed program for CXO's and Senior management from throughout the world. Chris called me today to say that the cases received outstanding reviews, and that the largely international CXO audience was both knowledgeable about, and very 'pro-Enron'! Best!
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Enron Harvard cases
Q: Attached please find the UPDATED responsibilities for the Global Contracts and Global Facilities teams. Due to restructuring within our group, we have lost three team members (Anthony Campos, Cyndie Balfour-Flanagan, and Ryan Sheeren) to the physical gas confirmation group. Our team members' individual responsibilities have changed as a result. Please forward the attached information to your staff and coworkers. Please call me at x30569 if you should have any questions. Thanks,
Propose a subject line
A: Global Contracts/Facilities new responsibilities
IN: We are disappointed to announce that Philippe Bibi, president and CEO of Enron Net Works, has resigned from Enron. Philippe will be joining Putnam Investments in Boston, Mass. as Chief Technology Officer. Philippe joined Enron in 1995, as Chief Information Officer for Enron Capital & Trading, and has been a key member of the team that built Enron's IT organization, including our numerous successful e-commerce initiatives. Philippe has been a great asset to Enron and our IT efforts. For six years, his creativity, intelligence, and focus have benefited the company in many ways. He will be missed. Philippe has agreed to make himself available to assist in the transition of his responsibilities. In the interim, all of the employees who report to Philippe will continue reporting to the Office of the Chairman for Enron Net Works. Please join us in thanking Philippe for his many years of service to the company and in wishing him the very best.

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Philippe Bibi
IN: This is an email
I have red-lined the changes that I feel we need to address for a short term spot deal with the City of Austin. Please review and let me have your comments. If you want ENA to do the deal, I need to make a few additional changes for the items ENA cannot do.

What is the subject?

OUT: Austin Energy Contract Draft
EPMI is entering into more and more transactions that are settled against a floating, published index price. Our physical contract does not currently provide for what happens if the published source is not available or is otherwise materially changed. Under ISDA for financial trading, this is addressed as a Market Disruption Event (MDE). Under ENA's standard contract for financial trading, there is included as a MDE "the imposition of trading limits on the range within which the price of the commodity may fluctuate". What this may mean is that if a cap is imposed on power prices, then in lieu of using the capped price to determine the floating price, you would be required (under ISDA) to eventually get brokers to determine what the price would have been without the cap. I want to add language to our physical contracts that addresses material changes/disappearance of the published prices that would mirror the financial trading terms and doubt whether we would want to make the imposition of a cap on power prices a MDE. If you treat the imposition of a cap (say in CA of prices to $500 or in NEPOOL to $1,000) as a MDE, then we would be required to secure quotes as to what the price would have been without the cap each time that a pricing date trades at the cap level. This only seems fraught with litigation risk to me. Alternatively, if caps are not deemed a MDE, then you would always settle against the published prices, even if they are "artificially" determined after the trade was entered into. While caps are not appealing, I think it would be better to not have the imposition of caps be considered a MDE. I have spoken with the financial trading group and they will follow our lead on this. So, depending upon what you both think, we will make sure that financial and physical power are treated the same on this issue. Thanks for your thoughts.
Answer:
Index Transactions