Further Typographic Errors Found in ISBP 645 and ISBP-Corrigenda.p65

Disclaimer

The names of the parties, as well as the data and information in the cases stated below, have been sanitized in order to protect the identity of the parties involved. The complexities of the cases have also been simplified to facilitate easy understanding of the key issues involved.
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 of the cases 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 article, opinion, or comment can be reproduced in whole or in part without our express written permission.

19 June 2003

Mr. Donald Smith and Mr. Gary Collyer
ISBP Working Party
ICC Banking Commission
Paris

Hello Don and Gary,

Further Typographic Errors Found in ISBP 645 and ISBP-Corrigenda.p65

After some typographic errors are corrected with ISBP-Corrigenda.p65, I have noted further typographic errors amongst the ISBP Paragraphs that have to be corrected. They are listed as follows:

For your convenience, I refer to the text in ICC Publication No. 645, a complimentary copy received from ICC Paris in March 2003.

Paragraph 6

In the final version ICC Document 470/951rev4, used for voting in ICC Banking Commission meetings held in Rome, in line 2, "Ltd." is with a full stop but in the ISBP 654, the full stop is gone. According to international trade practice, "Ltd" should always have a full stop.

Paragraph 45 (e)

In line 8, the first word after "Example:" should be capitalised, as it is the beginning of a new sentence. Hence "The" should replace "the". In the final version ICC Document 470/951rev4, "The" is however used.

Paragraph 102

In line 7, "Rev." should read "Rev.," to bring the words in line with the wording of Paragraphs 75 and 122.

"29, July 1999" should read "29 July 1999", to bring the wording in line with the wording of Paragraphs 75 and 122.

Paragraph 117

In line 1, "show" should read "shows" which is the exact word used in ICC Document 470/951rev4. "Show" is also grammatically incorrect.

Paragraph 128

In line 1, the word "that" after "requires" should be deleted to bring the words in line with the wording of Paragraph 84 ("requires a bill of lading" in line 1) where "that" is not used.

Paragraph 134

In line 1, the word "that" in the phrase "transport documents that expressly declare" should read "which" to bring the wording in line with the wording of Paragraphs 90, 111 and 160.

I also note that there is no equivalent paragraph to govern "clean" documents in road, rail or inland waterway transport documents as these documents may also bear negative remarks to highlight the defective condition of packaging.

Paragraph 140

In line 1, "show" should read "shows" which is the exact word used in ICC Document 470/951rev4. It is also grammatically incorrect.

Paragraph 143

In line 3, "transport documents or words" should read "transport documents, or words" to bring the wording in line with the wording of Paragraph 25 ("its letterhead, or" in line 5), 32 ("the UCP, or" in line 4), 61 ("not be present, or" in line 3) and 119 ("unloading the goods, or" in line 10).

Paragraph 153

In line 2, in ""Any European Airport"", the opening inverted commas (") should be used instead of closing inverted commas (").

Paragraph 166

In line 1, "show" should be "shows" which is the exact word used in ICC Document 470/951rev4. It is also grammatically incorrect.

Paragraph 172

In lines 5 and 6, "railway bill" should read "rail waybill" to be consistent with "air waybill" and "sea waybill", despite the fact that certain bankers and lawyers may use the term "airway bill" that is found in certain letter of credit stationery, such as the letter of credit application form.

A "bill" is certainly not a "waybill", as these two documents are different in nature and are governed by different international conventions and codes of law.

Paragraph 181

In line 2, "show" should read "shows" which is the exact word used in ICC Document 470/951rev4. It is also grammatically incorrect.

It is up to the ICC Banking Commission to decide whether there is a need to correct these errors, mostly typographic, with a second corrigenda or leave them until the revised version of ISBP 645.

In the ISBP Corrigenda.p65

Paragraph 107

There should be a comma (,) after "e.g." to bring the wording in line with the wording of ISBP 645 Paragraphs 20, 34, 40, 45 (d) & (e), 49, 65, 82, 83, 90, 98, 106, 111, 127, 128, 131, 134, 152, 153, 160 and 193.

Please announce to the letter of credit community that care should be taken in the use of the word "paragraph" (other than "article") to highlight that ISBP 645 is not rules. It is only a guideline to interpret the articles of UCP 500. This is also the practice of the ICC Banking Commission as reflected in wording used in ISBP-Corrigenda.p65.

T. O.

(416) 298-5881

(416) 292-5535