• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.39
• /
• pp.87-103
• /
• 2008

Two kinds of security devices such as independent guarantees and standby letters of credit have been widely used in the international transactions. These devices design to protect one of the parties from a breach by its counter-party. Main uses of these guarantees and standby letters of credit are as follows : bid guarantee, performance guarantee, advance payment guarantee, payment guarantee, retention guarantee, etc. The standby letters of credit were first invented in the U.S.A. and have been widely used in the international and domestic contracts in the U.S.A. But the practical use of these credits is very unsatisfactory in Korea. The purpose of this study is to serve the increase of practical use of the standby letters of credit in Korea through the comparison study on the practical use of the credits between Korea and the U.S.A. Both devices are very similar in function, but they are very different in forms. The one has the form of letter of credits but the other has the form of guarantee. The letter of credit has the stability of governing rule, the legal certainty, and the preference in the field of the trade community comparing to the guarantee. I recommend to use standby letter of credit instead of bank guarantee in international transactions because of the merits of the credit aforesaid.

• 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.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.353-375
• /
• 1998

This study is focused on the rules for resolving documentary credits disputes. First, International Chamber of Commerce published Documentary Credit Dispute Expertise Rules on October 1, 1997. The DOCDEX Rules are the International Chamber of Commerce(ICC) response to a clear call from the international banking community for a rapid, cost effective, expert-based dispute resolution mechanism for documentary credit practice, including bank-to-bank reimbursement issues. Next, The International Center for Letter of Credit Arbitration was established in September 1996. The Center was founded as a result of an initiative from within the letter of credit community and has been co-sponsored by the United States Council on International Banking(USCIB) and the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice Inc. In September, ICLOCA adopted its "Rules of Arbitration for Letter of Credit Disputes." Therefore, parties to letter of credit disputes should choose a appropriate dispute resolution mechanism under the circumstances in the future.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.22
• /
• pp.49-70
• /
• 2004

UCP 500 has introduced new words "International Standard Banking Practice" as the basis of the examination of documents under documentary credits. However, the words have caused confusion among parties concerned with letter of credits. So, at its May 2000 meeting, ICC Banking Commission established a task force to document international standard banking practice for the examination of documents presented under documentary credits(ISBP). The publication is the product of two and a half years of work by a task force of the ICC Banking Commission. It was approved by the full Commission at its meeting in Rome in October 2002. The ISBP is a practical complement to UCP 500. It explains how the rules are to be applied on a day-to-day basis. As such, it fills a needed gap between the general principles announced in the rules and the daily work of the documentary credit practitioner. But, ISBP have two problems. First, ISBP impose more responsibilities than before the ISBP existed on banks. Second, ISBP have some problematic articles like the problem of maturity, letter of credit language, term. Consequently, all parties concerned with documentary credits need to armour themselves with knowledge for ISBP. Also, it should be noted that any term in a documentary credit which modifies or affects the applicability of a provision of the UCP may also have an impact on international standard banking practice. Therefore, in considering the practices described in this publication, parties must take into account any term in a documentary credit that expressly excludes or modifies a provision in an article of the UCP.

• 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.13
• /
• pp.495-513
• /
• 2000

In this paper, I examined the terms of letter of credit and standard for examination of documents. In connection with the test of standard, I reviewed the bank's reasonable care, inconsistence and linkage between documents, non-documentary conditions and the treatment of discrepant documents. Traditionally credit law is founded on two principles such as the standards of strict of compliance and substantial compliance, but these standards are not consistency. Moreover although the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits(UCP) introduces a new standard for examination of documents by incorporating international banking practice, the standards for documentary compliance have created ambiguity. Accordingly, I suggest that the standard requires strict compliance between party concerned in letter of credit transactions but only requires international standard banking practice in customer relationship. Therefore the standard and the specific guideline should be prescribed in the next version of the UCP.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.22
• /
• pp.137-171
• /
• 2004

Under Article 2 of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1993 Revision. UCP), letter of credit means an arrangement whereby an issuing bank is to make a payment to a beneficiary, or is to accept and pay bills of exchange drawn by the beneficiary, or authorises another bank to effect such payment, or to accept and pay such bills of exchange, or to negotiate, against stipulated document(s), provided that the terms and conditions of the letter of credit are complied with. In letter of credit operations, all parties concerned deal with documents, and not with goods, services and/or other performances to which the documents may relate (UCP, Article 4). It is important to note that under UCP, if a letter of credit contains conditions without stating the document(s) to be presented in compliance therewith, banks will deem such conditions as not stated and will disregard them (Article 13 c). Section 5-108(g) of the Uniform Commercial Code also contains a similar provision. However on several occasions the Korean Supreme Court held that non-documentary conditions in letter of credit governed by UCP could be regarded as valid, although they were not desirable in the context of letter of credit transactions. The rationale underlying the decisions was that parties to the letter of credit transactions are free to determine the terms and conditions of the relevant letter of credit. After reviewing the relevant provisions of UCP, UCC, the International Standby Practices (ISP98) and the Supreme Court decisions of Korea, the author suggests that we classify conditions that do not require any documents (so called apparent non-documentary conditions) into two categories and treat them differently. There are apparent non-documentary conditions that are consistent with the nature of letter of credit and those which are inconsistent with the nature of letter of credit. In the first category there are two sub-categories, (i) those which are valid and (ii) those which are invalid and thus should be disregarded. In the second category there are two sub-categories, (i) those which are invalid and thus should be disregarded and (ii) those which are valid but deprive the instrument of the nature as letter of credit.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.29-60
• /
• 2004

Recently stand-by credits are using as surety devices in various global business transactions including sale of goods. Stand-by credits have lots of merits but simultaneously have high possibility of improper demand by the beneficiary due to the characteristics of the documents required. So so-called fraud rule has developed as a solution to the improper demand in letter of credit transactions. And the actual way of the fraud rule is the injunction by the competent court. The purpose of this article is to examine the applicability of the injunction in stand-by credit transactions by means of case studies. For this purpose, the author examined the concept of the injunction, necessity of the injunction in stand-by credit transactions and the cases of injunction granted and injunction denied. Firstly, the courts have legal standard of the application of injunction due to the legislation of the relative articles in the United Nations Convention on Independent Guarantees and Stand-by Letters of Credit and the Uniform Commercial Code. Secondly, the courts have taken a negative attitude granting injunction in order to observe the independence principle. Thirdly, the courts have a tendency to grant injunction when the demand has no conceivable basis and the applicant will suffer irreparable injury without injunction. Finally, like the saying 'prevention is the best cure', the applicant always pays attention with reasonable care before improper demand by the beneficiary.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.36
• /
• pp.47-84
• /
• 2007

The Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits ("UCP") may be treated as a useful laboratory for studying the scope and limitations of self regulation. This is due to its almost universal success on a global stage which provides it a perspective rarely available for self regulatory provisions and due to extensive experience of judicial review of it. In this sense, it is worthwhile to examine in brief the latest iteration of the UCP, Publication No. 600 ("UCP600"). This article describes and analyze some of core provisions of the UCP600 from the perspective of their adequacy as an exercise in self regulation. It is attempted first in view of several categories of private rulemaking; definitional rulemaking, default rules, procedural rules, and remedies. After that, it is examined second in view of sound rulemaking which is related to the relative role of law and practice. It points out rich and varied insights into the possibilities and problems associated with private rulemaking in connection with commercial transactions.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.61
• /
• pp.191-211
• /
• 2014

This paper intends to study some problems in the application of UCP 600 in the international trade transactions with China. Generally speaking, China complies with UCP 600 well. Nevertheless, there are some problems in the application of UCP 600 in China owing to the difference in law and practices. There are some problems in the application of UCP 600 in China owing to the difference of practices under Bills of Exchange Act and The Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Some Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Disputes over Letter of Credit. The Act insists on the formal requirements, the consistency between a letter amount and a figure amount, the unconditional payment character of bills of exchange. The Provisions include the recognition of revocable credits, the difference of standard in examining documents, the difference in the treatment of issuing banks in relation to discrepant documents. These aforesaid matters of the Act and the Provisions are inconsistent with the practices under the UCP 600. There are two main problems in the operation of letters of credit in China. One is the lack of concerned parties' practice knowledge in relation to letters of credit in China. The other is the inactive stance of nominated banks in China. There are two main problems in relation to judiciary institutions in China. First, judges in China tend to abuse the injunctions owing to the lack of understanding in relation to letters of credit. Secondly, there are inconsistency in the court ruling in China.