• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.50
• /
• pp.89-108
• /
• 2011

This work intends to study some issues in relation to the cancellation and amendment of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the cancellation are the significance and formation time of cancellation of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of cancellation of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the amendment are the significance and formation requirements of amendment of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of amendment of letter of credit. If exporters receive letters of credit from foreign countries, they must confirm the indication of irrevocable letter of credit. When they find revocable letters of credit, they should amend the credits to be irrevocable credits. If issuing banks amend letters of credit against beneficiaries, the banks should receive the beneficiaries' consent. If amendments devalue applicants' expectations in the underlying transaction, the applicants for whom the credit issues are not liable to reimburse. Beneficiaries and issuing banks may amend a credit, but the issuing bank acts at its own peril if it does not obtain the applicant's consent.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.33
• /
• pp.63-89
• /
• 2007

The UCP is an authoritative compilation of the customs and practice of letters of credit observed by most of the participants in the transaction. It remains the most successful set of private rules for trade ever developed. First issued in 1933, the UCP has been through five revisions, the latest being the present UCP 500, which came into force in 1994. Since 1994, new developments in transport, insurance, electronic commerce and banking industry have spurred the current revision of the rules. The ICC Banking Commission approved UCP 600 on October 25, 2006 by a unanimous vote of 91 to 0. The revision, which will come into effect on July 1, 2007, incorporates a number of changes from UCP 500 as follows : UCP 600 has a leaner set of rules, with 39 articles rather than 49 articles of UCP 500; New sections on "definitions" and "interpretations" have been added to clarify the meaning of ambiguous terms; The phrase "reasonable time" for acceptance or refusal of documents has been replaced by a firm period of five banking days; UCP 600 allows for the discounting of deferred payment credits. However, UCP 600 has two main problems such as the inconsistency with insurance industry and the banking community-oriented rules. We have some months before the commencement of UCP 600. From today to the commencement of UCP 600, we should study the full contents of UCP 600 and the influences on the trade industry.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.275-295
• /
• 2011

Any attempt which requires banks to consider non-documentary conditions would destroy autonomy principle and increase the risks of the bank in L/C transactions. Therefore, non-documentary conditions are disregarded in the letter of credit. This provision was first introduced in UCP500, but later, ICC Position Paper No.3 added that if L/C requires documents related to non-documentary conditions, it cannot be disregarded. While the language in UCP600 is basically the same as that in UCP500, there is a difference between the two in that the former disregards the documents related to non-documentary conditions even if they are required by L/C. However, it should be remembered that international standard banking practice does not disregard all of non-documentary conditions. It recognizes the validity of some non-documentary conditions which it is not feasible to change into documentary conditions. That is, such non-documentary conditions as can be determined from an index specified in the guarantee or identified from the issuing bank's own records or their normal operations are recognized as valid in legal cases. ISP98 and UR00758 do not consider these as non-documentary conditions. The applicant should be cautious not to include non-documentary conditions in their applications.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.64
• /
• pp.131-154
• /
• 2014

The International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under UCP 600 (ISBP 745) is the product by the Drafting Group of the ICC Banking Commission during a number of years. ISBP 745 is a practical complement to UCP 600, ICC's universally used rules on documentary credits. ISBP 745 does not amend UCP 600. Two rules should be read in their entirety and not in isolation. ISBP 745 explains, in explicit detail, how the UCP 600 rules are to be applied on a day-to-day basis. It fills a needed gap between the general principles announced in UCP 600 and the daily work of the documentary credit practitioners. It has developed into an invaluable aid to banks, corporates, logistics and insurance companies alike, on a global basis. By using ISBP 745, document checkers can bring their practices in line with those followed by their colleagues worldwide. The result should be a significant reduction in the number of shipping documents refused for discrepancies on first presentation. This study aims to summarize the reasons for revision of the ISBP rules and the key-points of ISBP 745, and to provide the documentary credit practitioners with some considerations under its practical application.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.203-221
• /
• 2014

ICC Banking Commission have approved the new version of ISBP for UCP 600(Publication 745) on April 17, 2013. This is called the ISBP 745. This revised version of ISBP includes a lot of shipping documents including bill of exchange. These shipping documents stated in the ISBP 745, especially the certificate of origin is the document necessary for carrying out the customs formalities in FTA era. Particularly, practitioners such as bankers, buyers and sellers, lawyers, freight forwarders and carriers in import and export transactions have to know the UCP 600 and ISBP 745 (2013) thoroughly in order to avoid the disputes due to discrepancies of the documents with the terms and conditions of the credit. The purpose of this article is to reduce the disputes occurred in the credit transaction by providing the examination criteria and case study of the certificate of origin in ISBP 745.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.46
• /
• pp.159-177
• /
• 2010

This work intends to study some problems in relation to the issuance of letters of credit. Those problems are the delay of issuing letters of credit, the reissuing letters of credit, and the issuing letters of credit in the third party's name. Sellers and buyers must keep in mind that the supply of letter of credit by buyer is the condition precedent for a seller's shipment obligation. A seller has no obligation to ship the goods until he receives the letter of credit by buyer's bank, issuing bank. An issuing bank can have the risk that an original letter of credit and a reissued letter of credit can be used double in the exporting country. The most safe method for issuing bank is to cancel the original letter of credit and to reissue a new letter of credit. When an issuing bank issues a letter of credit in the third party's name, the bank should investigate the background of the transaction and give the buyer a proper line of credit.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.51
• /
• pp.285-313
• /
• 2011

There can be analyzed severally on the acceptance conditions of freight forwarder's transport document under UCP. First, Bills of Lading issued by forwarding agents will be refused. This can be seen in the article 20 of 1933 Revision UCP(Brochure 82) and the article 20 of 1951 Revision UCP(Brochure 151). Second, Unless specifically authorized in the credit, Bills of Lading issued by forwarding agent will be rejected. It is prescribed in the front part (a) of article 17 of 1962 Revision UCP(Brochure 222) and the article 19 of 1974 Revision UCP(Publication No. 290). Third, Acceptance conditions are different according to the type of transport documents, that is either Bill of Lading or not. It is prescribed in the art 25 and article 26 of 1983 Revision UCP. Unless otherwise stipulated in the credit, transport document issued by a freight forwarder will be rejected unless it is the FIATA Combined Transport Bill of Lading approved by the International Chamber of Commerce or otherwise indicates that it is issued by a freight forwarder acting as a carrier or agent of a named carrier. On the other hand, unless otherwise stipulated in the credit, marine bill of lading issued by a freight forwarder will be rejected, unless it indicates that it is issued by such freight forwarder acting as a carrier, or as the agent of a named carrier. Fourth, transport documents issued by a freight forwarder will be accepted. This can be found in the article 30 of 1993 Revision UCP(ICC Publication No. 500) and the article 14 l of 2007 Revision UCP(ICC Publication No. 600). According to the former unless otherwise authorized in the Credit, transport document issued by a freight forwarder will only be accepted if it is appears on its face to indicate the name of the freight forwarder as a carrier or multimodal transport operator or its agent. The latter prescribed that a transport document will be accepted if it is issued by a freight forwarder by a agent of carrier or freight forwarder itself.