Exhibit 5.1
July 1, 2019
Fiserv, Inc.,
255 Fiserv Drive,
Brookfield, Wisconsin 53045.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
In connection with the registration under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Act”) of €500,000,000 aggregate principal amount of the 0.375% Senior Notes due 2023 (the “2023 Notes”), €500,000,000 aggregate principal amount of the 1.125% Senior Notes due 2027 (the “2027 Notes”), €500,000,000 aggregate principal amount of the 1.625% Senior Notes due 2030 (the “2030 Notes”), £525,000,000 aggregate principal amount of the 2.250% Senior Notes due 2025 (the “2025 Notes”) and £525,000,000 aggregate principal amount of the 3.000% Senior Notes due 2031 (the “2031 Notes” and, together with the 2023 Notes, the 2027 Notes, the 2030 Notes and the 2025 Notes, the “Securities”) of Fiserv Inc., a Wisconsin corporation (the “Company”), we, as your counsel, have examined such corporate records, certificates and other documents, and such questions of law, as we have considered necessary or appropriate for the purposes of this opinion.
Upon the basis of such examination, it is our opinion that the Securities constitute valid and legally binding obligations of the Company, subject to bankruptcy, insolvency, fraudulent transfer, reorganization, moratorium and similar laws of general applicability relating to or affecting creditors’ rights and to general equity principles.
In rendering the foregoing opinion, we are expressing no opinion as to Federal or state laws relating to fraudulent transfers and we are not passing upon, and assume no responsibility for, any disclosure in any registration statement or any related prospectus or other offering material relating to the offer and sale of the Securities.
The foregoing opinion is limited to the Federal laws of the United States and the laws of the State of New York, and we are expressing no opinion as to the effect of the laws of any other jurisdiction. With respect to all matters of Wisconsin law, we note that you have received an opinion, dated July 1, 2019 of Lynn S. McCreary, the Company’s Chief Legal Officer. In rendering the foregoing opinion, we have assumed,