• 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.20
• /
• pp.295-315
• /
• 2003

Since the end of World War II, the standby letters of credit have been used as a surety device, serving as a performance bond and guarantee in the world. UCP has been used a governing rule for standby letters of credit transactions in international commercial transactions. But the UCP may be sufficient for certain simple standbys, it is not fully applicable nor appropriate for standbys - as is recognized in UCP 500 Article 1. On the other hand, the International Standby Practices(ISP98) provide rules of practice drafted specifically for standby letters of credit intended as an alternative to UCP 500. It became effective on January 1, 1999. In addition to restating general rules applicable to all independent undertakings with greater precision than does UCP 500, thereby reducing the possibility of litigation, it addresses issues that commonly arise in standby practice not addressed in UCP 500. UCP 500 is valid and still applies to standby letter of credit "to the extent to which they may be applicable." Since ISP98 and UCP 500 coexist and may be applicable to standby letters of credit by incorporation, applicants, beneficiaries and issuers have a choice. This study will assist all interested parties in establishing the right rules for the right product, for the right standby letters of credit.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.39
• /
• pp.59-85
• /
• 2008

An independent bank guarantee(aka an independent guarantee) is provided as an security on a principal obligor's performance of his obligation, and a guarantor should pay the guaranteed amount only upon a beneficiary's written demand. A standby letter of credit has been used in the United States, since it was construed that a bank should not issue a guarantee. There was wide misunderstanding that a standby letter of credit differs from an independent bank guarantee. However, a standby letter of credit is the same security as an independent bank guarantee, and in international business a standby letter of credit is not differentiated from a independent bank guarantee. An independent bank guarantee are independent from the underlying contract, unconditional, and irrevocable. And a guarantor should pay upon written demand without proving a principal obligor breaches the underlying contract. These features of an independent bank guarantee has been abused in international transactions. Thus it has been proposed that some exceptions to the features of an independent bank guarantee should be allowed. United Nations Convention on Independent Guarantees and Standby Letter of Credit(1995) stipulates some exceptions to payment obligation. Export bond insurance, a part of export insurances, operated by the Korea Export Insurance Corporation under the Export Insurance Act, is used as a security for unfair calling by a beneficiary under an independent bank guarantee. Most of the export subsides by the government are prohibited under WTO's Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. However, as export insurance is allowed under the WTO, it operates a significant role in enhancing the export. In the event that export bond insurance is provided for a guarantor, an obligor who is subject to recourse by a guarantor, can be exempt from the recourse in case of unfair calling. The Korea Export Insurance Corporation, an insurer, bears unfair calling risk by a beneficiary. Generally it is understood that a demand shall be made before the expiry of an independent bank guarantee. However this is not absolutely true, it shall be decided by URDG, ISP98, the governing law.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.76
• /
• pp.103-123
• /
• 2017

If additional condition in letter of credit is used in malicious way, it affects the international trade transaction in jeopardy. Therefore, it's significant to identify whether additional conditions are malicious or ordinary in the transaction with letter of credit. In normal cases, thanks to lots of useful features as an international payment method, such as security of payment, legal protection, and versatility, a letter of credit is widely used in international trade. However, even with these advantageous features, a letter of credit is complicate and costly to use, compared to other payment methods. Furthermore, due to its principle of independence from underlying contract, a use of letter of credit creates another type of concern for proper handling and needs significant caution upon field use. At some points, malicious additional conditions are used for buyer's advantage in deal making and fraud instance in worst situation. In addition, some countries request malicious conditions against sellers as a non-tariff barrier. Therefore it's extremely important to recognize whether malicious additional condition exists in letter of credit and, if so, how to deal with it. This study delivers the information to distinguish and categorize the malicious conditions in various cases and to figure out how to deal with them for safer trade with less risk.

• 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.19 no.3
• /
• pp.161-178
• /
• 2009

This article focuses on the enforceability of arbitration agreements m the dispute of standby letter of credit, especially with the case analysis of the leading case from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. In Nova Hut a.s. v. Kaiser Group International Inc. case, while the underlying contract contained an arbitration clause, a guarantee to assure contractor's performance did not contain an arbitration clause. Nova Hut drew on the standby for the Contractor's failure to deliver contractual obligations. Against the Kaiser's action under US Bankruptcy law, Nova Hut moved to stay the proceedings pending arbitration, to compel arbitration, and to dismiss the complaint. The US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware denied Nova Hut's motions. On appeal, Kaiser argued that it was not subject to arbitration since it was not a party to the contract. It also argued that Nova Hut had waived its right to arbitration by filing a proof of claim in the bankruptcy proceeding and commencing legal actions in other countries. The appeals court noted that in order to avoid arbitration on those grounds prejudice must be shown. It indicated that because there was no long delay in requesting arbitration and no discovery conducted m the course of litigation, the Kaiser could not demonstrate actual prejudice on the part of Owner. In light of public policy favoring arbitration, the nature of the claims in the parties' agreements, Kaiser's conduct in embracing the agreements, and their expectation of benefit, the appeals court ruled that the doctrine of equitable estoppel applied in requiring the Parent to arbitrate.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.17
• /
• pp.7-35
• /
• 2002

In many international financing transactions Korean companies are required to issue a guarantee. Thus far, however, legal issues on international guarantees have not been fully discussed in Korea. This is partly because most of the international guarantees are governed by a foreign law such as English law or the laws of the State of New York. In this articles the author examines major concepts or terms and conditions of a typical international guarantee, e.g., language on consideration, primary obligor, joint and several guarantee, unconditional and irrevocable guarantee, continuing guarantee, right of subrogation, representations and warranties, covenant or undertaking, currency indemnity, assignment, participation, governing law and jurisdiction clause, etc. For reference, standard forms of a guarantee and a standby letter of credit are attached to the article. In examining the terms and conditions, the author compares them with similar or equivalent concepts under Korean law. The author further discusses some Korean law issues that may arise under international guarantees governed by a foreign law. These issues include the application of the ultra vires doctrine under Article 34 of the Civil Code of Korea, the validity of an international guarantee which a Korean company has issued in violation of the guarantee ceiling set under Article 10 of the Law on Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade of Korea and the validity of an international guarantee which a Korean party has issued in violation of the Foreign Exchange Transaction Law. In addition, the author discusses some issues under a so-called independent guarantee and a standby letter of credit. In this regard, reference is made to the Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantee (URDG), International Standby Practices (ISP98) and the Convention on Independent Guarantees and Stand-by Letters of Credit adopted by the United Nations in 1995. Finally, the author examines major terms and conditions of typical comfort letters and discusses some legal issues, such as the binding force of the comfort letter. In dealing with the issues the author underscores that to the extent the issues are not properly dealt with by an international norm such as Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits or ISP 98, the issues must be analyzed by reference to the governing law of the relevant instrument.

• 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.42
• /
• pp.133-160
• /
• 2009

In International trade the buyer and seller are normally separated from on another not only by distance but also by differences in language and culture. It is rarely possible for the performance of obligations to be simultaneous and the performance of contracts therefore calls for trust in a situation in which the parties are unlikely to feel able to trust each other unless they have a longstanding and successful relationship. Thus the seller under an international contract of sale will not wish to surrender documents of title to goods to the buyer until he has at least an assurance of payment, and no buyer will wish to pay for goods until he has received them. A gap of distrust thus exists which is often bridged by the undertaking of an intermediary known and trusted by both parties who will undertake on his own liability to pay the seller the contract price in return for the documents of title and then pass the documents to the buyer in return for the reimbursement. This is a common explanation of the theory behind the documentary letter of credit in which the undertaking of a bank of international repute serves as a "guarantee" to each party that the other will perform his obligations. The independence principle, also referred to as the "autonomy principle", is at the core of letter of credit or bank guarantee law. This principle provides that the letter of credit or bank guarantee is independent of the underlying contractual commitment - that is, the transaction that the credit is intented to secure - between the applicant and the beneficiary ; the credit is also independent of the relationship between the bank and its customer, the applicant. The most important exception to the independence principle is the doctrine of fraud in the transaction. A strict interpretation of the rule that the guarantee is independent of the underlying transaction would lead to the conclusion that neither fraud nor manifest abuse of rights by the beneficiary would constitute an objection to payment. There is one major problem related to "Independent guarantees", namely abusive or unfair callings. The beneficiary may make an unfair calling under the guarantee. The countermeasure of beneficiary's unfair calling divided three cases. First, advance countermeasure namely by contract. In other words, when the formation of the contract, the parties must insert the Force Majeure Clause, Arbitration Clause to Contract, and clear statement to the condition for demand calling. Second, post countermeasure namely by court. Many countries, including the United States, authorize the courts to grant an order enjoining the issuer from paying or enjoining the beneficiary from receiving payment under the guaranty letter. Third, Export Insurance. For example, the Export Credit Guarantees Department is prepared, subject to certain conditions, to cover the risk of unfair calling. Of course, KEIC in Korea is cover the risk of the all things for guarantees. On international projects, contractor performance is usually guaranteed by either a standby letters of credit or Independent guarantee. These instruments will be care the parties.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.33
• /
• pp.3-28
• /
• 2007

A non-documentary conditions is a condition contained in the credit without reference to the presented document in compliance therewith, thereby causing many problems to all parties involved in letter of credit transactions. The purpose of this study is to examine the regulations on the non-documentary conditions under Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits: UCP, International Standby Practices: ISP98, United Nations Convention on Independent Guarantee and Stand-by Letters of Credit: CIGSLC and Uniform Commercial Code: UCC and also the opinions on the effect of non-documentary conditions through the analysis of several cases on the non-documentary conditions. The result of this study can be summarized as follows: First, UCP, ISP98, CIGSLC and UCC stipulate that banks will deem non-documentary conditions as not stated and will disregard them. Second, courts used to permit the effect of non-documentary conditions. Finally, all parties should not attempt to put in any non-documentary conditions in order to prevent disputes on the effect of non-documentary conditions.