Clean B/L?

Disclaimer

Our expert's opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of the ICC or the ICC Commission on Banking Technique and Practice. No legal imputation should be attached to any of the contents here and no legal responsibility is accepted for any errors, omissions or misleading statements or opinions caused by negligence or otherwise. Our expert's opinions are given for your reference only and you should not rely upon or act on our opinions, of which we are not held liable. You should consult your legal counsel or other experts for their opinions in your specific cases.
No opinions or comments can be reproduced in whole or in part without our express written permission.

Posted in DC-Pro on Nov 10, 2002
Philip,
Your interesting input inspires me to write a book named "The Funny Side of Letter of Credit Operations" after my retirement, about three years after the launch of UCP 500 2.0 or UCP X00. This book may ...
In my consultancy career for the past many years, I do have many interesting stories to tell. As I said, anything could happen, whether it appears to be possible or not.
To give members a preview, here is one short story concerning chuckle and FOB.
When I explained “FOB” in Incoterms 1990, the male attendees in the in-house workshop all chuckled. In the coffee break I found out that in this particular company this Incoterm was used to express a staff member’s ill feelings when ...
T. O.
[edited Nov 10, 2002]

Posted in DC-Pro on Nov 9, 2002
Philip,
CERTAIN RELATED THOUGHTS INSPIRED BY YOUR INPUT - JUST TO CREATE SOME FUN HERE
In this particular situation, presentation of evidence (document if you will) must be made by the husband, or if presentation is made by the wife stealer [shall we call him the “beneficiary” for certain service(s) or performance(s) if not goods?], it must be ...
By the way, the UCP 500 does not allow ...
Solely for the purpose of creating some humour here, who should present a NOC [Notice of Completeness for certain performance(s) or service(s), if not "obligations", in single or plural number all depending on how many times they meet]? And who to present a NOD/R (Notice of Dishonour/Refusal) where NOC, NOD/R may not necessarily take the same interpretations as in the eUCP, UCP 500 or ISBP?
And last but not least, what is the "reasonable time" [for such unauthorized if not "unclean" service(s) or performance(s)]?
Hope this input would amuse members and make the Discussion Forum livelier.
[edited Nov 9, 2002]

Posted in DC-Pro on Nov 8, 2002
Jeremy,
May we ask you, a banker who knows laws, a question:
Can suspicion be reasons for rejection of documents?
From legal perspective, ...
A Chinese word of wisdom again:
"If one wishes to catch the man who steals one’s wife, one must ..."
One just can't propose a divorce merely relying on ... This applies to DC operations as well, whether you like it or not!
Otherwise all presentations could be ...
[edited Nov 8, 2002]

Posted in DC-Pro on Nov 7, 2002
Philip,
TO SAY IN A PRESENTED DOCUMENT THAT THE ISSUER MAY OR MAY NOT DO CERTAIN THINGS IS OK
Further to our lengthy input, we would like to point out that for any message/endorsement in the BL (or a presented document) that the carrier (or issuer) sates that it MAY OR MAY NOT do certain things, the UCP 500 would not regard this sort of “reminder or warning” message as ...
Example?
Sub Article ##### regarding ...
Sub Article ##### regarding ...
Sub Article ##### regarding ...
Sub Article ##### regarding ...
From the above quoted sub Articles, it is now clear that the UCP 500 allows ...
KYM IN ADDITION TO KYC
In other trades, the service provider has to ...
Document examiners must understand this. Otherwise they may kill the underlying transactions by merely determining discrepancies "on the face". A good banker has to know the market practices (shall we call this KYM (k*** y*** m***)) in addition to KYC (k*** y*** c***).
TO STATE SOMETHING DONE TO THE DISADVANTAGE OF THE APPLICANT IN THE PRESENTED DOCUMENT IS NOT OK
So unless the presented document clearly indicates that the issuer has DONE certain things, to the disadvantage of the Applicant, the UCP 500 would ...
Therefore in your case, the reminder message in the BL ...
WE MAY INFER THE ANSWER FROM OTHER ARTICLES OF UCP AND ISBP
When we have doubts over an issue that is not expressly stipulated in the UCP 500 or ISBP, we may look at ...
In ... we often use such approach to find out ... Hence studying ... may help to resolve problems in UCP and ISBP.
[edited Nov 7, 2002]

Posted in DC-Pro on Nov 6, 2002
Philip,
For easy reference of members, the pre-printed clause that brings you troubles is quoted hereunder:
QUOTE
'The term ''apparent good order and condition'' when used in this b/l with reference to iron, steel or metal products or wood products does not mean that the goods, when received, were fee of visible rust or moisture staining, chaffing and/or breakage. If the shipper so requests, a subsitute b/l will be issued omitting the above definition and setting forth any notations as to rust or moisture staining, chaffing and/or breakage which may appear on the Mate's, or Tally Clerk's Receipts'
UNQUOTE
We assume that in your query by the word “fee” you should mean “free”. Also “subsitute” is a typo of “substitute”.
The pre-printed clause quoted above reflects ...
FIRST PART OF CARRIER’S DECLARATION
QUOTE
The term ''apparent good order and condition'' when used in this b/l with reference to iron, steel or metal products or wood products does not mean that the goods, when received, were fee of visible rust or moisture staining, chaffing and/or breakage.
UNQUOTE
This issue is not expressly stated in the UCP 500 or the recently approved ISBP. However, the carrier declares on the BL that by using the term “in apparent good order and condition”, it does not mean that ...
SECOND PART OF CARRIER’S DECLARATION
QUOTE
If the shipper so requests, a substitute b/l will be issued omitting the above definition and setting forth any notations as to rust or moisture staining, chaffing and/or breakage which may appear on the Mate's, or Tally Clerk's Receipts'
UNQUOTE
Having said that, but stating so OPENLY on the BL - The carrier may issue or re-issue a BL with ...
COMMON SENSE APPROACH
To use common sense, we think that the BL should appear OK. Why?
If the shipper/beneficiary actually presented a “cleaned” BL against a LOI, he should ...
A Chinese word of wisdom goes:
“The one who has just consumed some food stolen from the kitchen would ...”.
Another story about stupidity. A rich man in ancient China worried about ... So he wrote a declaration ...
Would the shipper/beneficiary in your case be another rich man from ancient China?
[edited Nov 7, 2002]

(905) 237-6465

(905) 237-6867