• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.41
• /
• pp.25-50
• /
• 2009

In this article, I have reviewed the definition of international mercantile customs, their preferential application, the developing status of the credit practice, the effectiveness and relationship of the international standard banking practices, e.g. UCP 600 and ISBP 2007, ISP98, URR 725, eUCP 1.1. and the like, established by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). It is important to emphasize that the autonomous agreements between the credit parties and the international practice on the credit transaction are respected above all because of the special nature of its transaction. When we want to apply to a letter of credit by the international rules - UCP 600, ISP98, URDG, URR 725 and eUCP 1.1, we must indicate expressly in the text of the credit that it is subject to the respective rule. But the International Standard Banking Practice, 2007 revised by the ICC is applicable to without its indication in case of the UCP 600 credit. On the other hand, the UN Convention on Guarantees and Standby Credits applies to an international undertaking referred to in its article 2, (a) if the guarantor/issuer is in a Contracting State, or (b) if the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a Contracting State, unless the undertaking excludes the application of the Convention. And this Convention applies also to an international credit not falling within its article 2, if it expressly states that it is subject to this Convention.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.22
• /
• pp.107-135
• /
• 2004

The International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under Documentary Letters of Credit (ISBP) is the product by the ICC Banking Commission, October 2002. The ISBP is a practical complement to UCP 500, ICC's universally used rules on documentary credits. It explains, in explicit detail, how the rules are to be applied on a day-to-day basis. It fills a needed gap between the general principles announced in the rules and the daily work of the documentary credit practitioner. By using the ISBP, 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 documents refused for discrepancies on first presentation. We are convinced that the benefits of the ISBP will not only be of high importance for users of UCP 500, but also that the practices in the ISBP will survive a UCP revision, or will even be included in the next version of the rule (so call "UCP 600"). Though the above-mentioned benefits of the ISBP, there are several troublesome topics that will probably have to wait for a new UCP revision. It will be a challenge for the drafters of a future UCP to find solutions that will further clarify these points.

• 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.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.429-460
• /
• 1999

The letter of credit is quintessentially international. In the absence of international legal system, a private system based on banking practices has evolved, commanding the adherence of the international letter of credit community and providing the foundation of th reputation of this instrument. To maintain this international system, it is vital that international standard banking practice should not be subject to local interpretations that misconstrue or distort it. The UCP is a formulation of international standard banking practice. It is neither positive law nor a "contract term" in any traditional sense and its interpretation must be consonant with its character as a living repositary of international understanding in this field. As a result, the interpretation and application of specific articles of the UCP must be consistent with its evolving character and history and with the principles upon which sound letter of credit practice is predicated. This study, especially, focuses on article 13 and article 14 of the UCP500. Article 13(b) of UCP500 stipulates that banks will have a reasonable time, not to exceed seven days, to examine documents to determine whether they comply facially with the terms of the credit. The seven-day provision is not designed as a safe harbor, because the rule requires the issuer to act within a reasonable time. But, by virtue of the deletion of the preclusion rule in the document examination article in UCP500, however, seven days may evolve as something of a safe harbor, especially for banks that engage in strategic behavior. True, under UCP500 banks are supposed to examine documents within a reasonable time, but there are no consequences in UCP500 for a bank's violation of that duty. It is only in the next provision. Courts might read the preclusion more broadly than the literal reading mentioned here or might fashion a common-law preclusion rule that does not require a showing of detriment. Absent that kind of development, the change in the preclusion rule could have adverse effects on the beneficiary. The penalty, strict estoppel or strict preclusion, under UCP500 and 95UCC differs from the classic estoppel. The classic estoppel rule requires a beneficiary to show three elements. 1. conduct on the part of the issuer that leads the beneficiary to believe that nonconforming documents do conform; 2. reasonable reliance by the beneficiary; and 3. detriment from that reliance. But stict preclusion rule needs not detrimental reliance. This strict estoppel rule is quite strict, and some see it as a fitting pro-beneficiary rule to counterbalance the usually pro-issuer rule of strict compliance.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.241-265
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to examine the Banks's Examination of Documents in the L/C Transactions. Most of all, this article deals with one of most important aspects of the law on documentary credits, namely, the compliance of documents presented with the terms and conditions of a letter of credit. In addition, the general principles of strict compliance will be considered and in the next, the requirements of specific documents such as invoices, transport documents and insurance policies. This area of letter of credit law is shaped not only by judge-made decisions but also the articles of Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, the International Standard Banking Practice(ISBP Publication No.745) prepared by the Banking Committee of the International Chamber of Commerce as well as the position papers and opinions of the latter. Whether a document complies with the terms of a letter of credit is essentially a matter of examination and construction of the document in question against the terms of the letter of credit under which it is presented, articles of the UCP, ISBP as well as the opinions and statements of the Banking Committee. Most of all this article was focused on provisions of UCP600. Comparison with provisions of UCP500 have been drawn where appropriate.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.7 no.4
• /
• pp.219-243
• /
• 2005

The Purpose of this Article is to analyze the examination criteria on the compliance of multimodal transport document in the ISBP. When the goods are taken in charge by the multimodal transport operator, he shall issue a multimodal transport document which, at the option of the consignor, shall be in either negotiable or non-negotiable form. The multimodal transport document shall be signed by the multimodal transport operator or by a person having authority from him. When the multimodal transport document is presented by the beneficiary to the bank in the letter of credit operations, the bank should examinate the bill of exchange and/or shipping documents, including multimodal transport document. There are two rules in connection with examination of the documents in the letter of credit operations. One is the "Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits(UCP 500)" approved by the Banking Commission in March 10, 1993, the other is the "International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under Documentary Letters of Credits(ISBP)" approved by the ICC Banking Commission in October 2002. Therefore, this Article has studied the multimodal transport document presented under documentary credits on the basis of the UCP 500 and the ISBP it reflects.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.33
• /
• pp.91-118
• /
• 2007

In the transaction of credits, banks must examine the presentation to determine, on the basis of the documents alone, whether or not the documents appear on their face to constitute a complying presentation. And bank shall each have a maximum of five banking days following the day of presentation to determine if a presentation is complying. This period does not depend on any upcoming expiry date or last day for presentation. Data in a document, when read in context with the credit, the document itself and international standard banking practice, need not be identical to, but must not conflict with, data in i) that document; ii) any other stipulated document; or iii) the credit. When a bank determines that a presentation is complying, it must honour or negotiate. But, when a bank determine that a presentation does not comply, it may refuse to honour or negotiate. When a bank decides to refuse to honour or negotiate, it must give a single notice to that effect to the presenter. That notice must be given by telecommunication or, if that is not possible, by other expeditious means no later than the close of the fifth banking day following the day of presentation.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.201-220
• /
• 2016

A bill of lading is a document which is signed by the carrier or his agent acknowledging that the goods have been shipped on board a named vessel bound for the destination and stating the terms on which the goods so received are to be carried. Therefore, the bill of lading is a document of title enabling the holder to obtain credit from banks before the arrival of the goods, for the transfer of the bill of lading can operate as a pledge of the goods themselves. In the other words the bill of lading creates a privity between its holder and the carrier as if the contract was made. A bill of lading, for obtaining credit from banks, must appear to indicate the carrier's name and signature, the "shipped on board" notation, the port of loading and unloading stated in the sales contract and the credit. Data in the bill of lading, when read in context with the sales contract, the credit, the bill of lading itself and international standard banking practice, need not be identical to, but must not conflict with, data in that bill of lading, any other stipulated document, the sales contract or the credit. The surrender bill of lading, stamping "surrendered" on the original bill of lading by request of the shipper, is not recognized the legal effectiveness as a document of title by the statutory law and court. The surrender bill of lading may increase the risk of impossibility of payment to the holder. Therefore, the surrender bill of lading should be used restrictively between the credible parties and suggested to avoid in the other cases.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.161-189
• /
• 2006

This paper is aiming at analyzing case law of India in relation with reasonable time to make decision whether to accept or to refuse the documents received from the presenter in credit transactions. As specified in UCP, the failure to refuse to accept the documents within a reasonable time precludes the Issuing Bank, Confirming Bank (if any) and Nominated Bank from asserting that they are discrepant. Compliance of the stipulated documents on their face with the terms and conditions of the credit shall be determined by international standard banking practice as reflected in this Articles of UCP 500. The Issuing bank is only to be held responsible for honoring the documents presented by beneficiary through the nominated banks if they are strictly in compliance with terms and conditions of the Credit. As any well experienced banker knows, however, a word-by-word, letter-by-letter correspondence between the documents and the credit terms means a practical impossibility. Thus the notion of reasonable care in conjunction with the doctrine of strict compliance mixed with International Standard Banking Practices has not played a right functional standard for checking the documents as stipulated in the credit and UCP 500. And so the rejection rate is highly estimated at approximately 50% in EU and 40 to 70% according to their geographical locations in the USA. As a result, it can possibly be inferred from this fact that the credit industry would be facing the functional failure as the international trade credit facility, if not supported with motive power as a relevant scheme in UCP 500. It is quite important to note that UCP 500 Article 13(b) which specify the time limit for the banks to notify the presenter their decision not to accept the documents within a reasonable time not to exceed seven banking days following the day of receipt of documents would be the motive engine to improve the negotiability of documents in international trade financial facility.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.177-197
• /
• 2013

The updated International Standard Banking Practice(ISBP), International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 745, was published to bring its contents in line with UCP 600. The ISBP 745 has dealt with A-Q that are commonly arising in the credit transactions and also explains in detail some of the articles of UCP 600 with the proper interpretation. The updated version ISBP 745 involved aligning it with UCP 600, making certain technical adjustments in expression of words such as "in conflict" instead of "inconsistent", etc. Despite the updated ISBP 745, there remains a question. Where the words "from" or "after" are used in regard to something other than a period of shipment or the maturity date of drafts, there is no guidance from the UCP as to its meaning. The party concerned in credit transactions is also required to have a full understanding of ISBP 745 and the articles of UCP 600 in order to acquire the documents preparation and examination facilitating the parties to minimize discrepancies.