Message-ID: <31215955.1075844550093.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 04:30:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: sara.shackleton@enron.com
To: susan.flynn@enron.com
Subject: SITA
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Sara Shackleton
X-To: Susan Flynn
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Sara_Shackleton_Dec2000_June2001_1\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: SHACKLETON-S
X-FileName: sshackle.nsf

Please put attached in the SITA file.  The ISDA parties are ENA and SITA.  
Michael Khajeh-No in the London office will be negotiating this agreement 
with SITA on behalf of ENA.
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 05/05/2000 
12:27 PM ---------------------------


Michael Khajeh-Noori
05/05/2000 10:54 AM
To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Elliott/LON/ECT@ECT, Deepak 
Sitlani/LON/ECT@ECT 
Subject: SITA

Sara

In advance of your calling me later this afternoon, I set out below some 
thoughts the issues to be discussed:

1. Jurisdiction - under the English law Annex the preferable route is 
recourse to the courts - I can confirm that this is Enron London's policy.

2, Non-reliance:  From our telephone conversation yesterday, I understood 
that you said that the CP would be relying on us.  I believe that this should 
not be the case and the usual non-reliance provisions should apply.  If this 
is not the case, then

3. the additional para. (h) that you faxed me earlier today, I am informed, 
is unnecessary.  I also understand that the practical effect of those 
provisions might be to scare the CP.

Please call me so that we can discuss any of the above and/or to confirm that 
you are happy for the documents to go out to the CP.

Thanks
Michael