Further Typographic Errors Found in ISBP 645 and ISBP Corrigenda

L/C Monitor, Volume 5, Issue 4, July - August 2003

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.

In October 2002, the ICC Banking Commission approved a document entitled "International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under Documentary Credits (ISBP)". In June 2003, several refinements to the text were issued in the form of a "corrigenda".

According to ICC official statement, "only one of these changes (concerning paragraph 187) was a substantive change. The other changes were minor and mechanical and have no impact on the substance."

The full text of the corrigenda can be found on the ICC Web Site under:

http://www.iccwbo.org/home/menu_banking.asp.

"Only one of these changes (concerning paragraph 187) was a substantive change."

ICC

Our research has found further typographic errors not mentioned in the CORRIGENDA to the ISBP ICC publication 645 - January 2003. Our findings can be found on our web site http://www.tolee.com

Here is a sample of what ICC has found and what we have found.

A Sampling of what ICC has found

Quote from ICC web site:

"The following changes have to be read in conjunction with the original English edition of the ISBP, first published by the ICC in January 2003. Note that future reprints of the ISBP will incorporate the changes below.

The following paragraph has been amended:

Paragraph 187. The final sentence of the paragraph - i.e. the sentence beginning with the words "An insurance document that clearly reflects ... " - has been deleted.

The changes below and any other minor changes are mechanical only and do not affect the substance:

Paragraph 103.b): The last line, which formerly read, "on whose behalf it is signing is required to be stated." will now read: "on whose behalf it is signing must be stated."
(to bring the wording in line with the wording of paragraphs 76.c) and 123.c))

Paragraph 107 will now read: "If a credit requires a charter party bill of lading to show that the goods are consigned to a named party, e.g., "consigned to Bank X" (a "straight" consignment), rather than "to order" or "to order of Bank X", the charter party bill of lading must not contain words such as "to order" or "to order of" that precede the name of that named party, whether typed or pre-printed. Likewise, if a credit requires the goods to be consigned "to order" or "to order of" a named party, the bill of lading must not show that the goods are consigned straight to the named party."
(to bring the wording in line with the wording of paragraphs 84 and 128)

Paragraph 113. The words "and is deleted," at the end of the first clause will be changed to read "and has been deleted,". (to bring the wording in line with the wording of paragraphs 92, 136 and 162)

Paragraph 116. The words "authentication for" will now read "authentication of ..."

End Quote [For further details see: http://www.iccwbo.org/home/menu_banking.asp.] Please note: THE ABOVE MENTIONED IS NOT THE FULL TEXT OF THE ISBP CORRIGENDA.

A Sampling of what T.O. Lee Consultants Ltd. has found

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 capitalized, 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 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 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 172

In lines 5 & 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 typographical, with a second corrigenda or leave them until the revised version of ISBP 645.

Care should be taken that the word "paragraph" should be used (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-Corrigenada.p65.

(416) 298-5881

(416) 292-5535