• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.101-115
• /
• 2009

More than two years have passed since the latest UCP, Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, 2007 Revision, ICC Publication No.600 became valid on July 1, 2007. There has been a lot of confusions in connection with the interpretation of the new UCP since July 1, 2007. Especially the transport document articles of the new UCP are the most confusing ones. Therefore, this work intends to study some points for practical attention of transport documents in the UCP 600. Transport documents can be divided into two kinds of documents such as marine transport documents and other transport documents. But most sellers and buyers distinguish two kinds of transport documents : the document of title and the document of non-title. Most traders consider the document of title importantly and ignore the document of non-title.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.35
• /
• pp.71-98
• /
• 2007

UCP 600 approved at the Banking Commission Meeting of ICC at the end of October, 2006 comes into effect from July 1, 2007. The main revision of the UCP 600 concerning the sea transport document are as follows. First, if the bill of lading contains an on-board-notation, with the date of shipment, the date stated in the on-board-notation will be deemed the date of shipment. Secondly, phrases "on its face" and "otherwise authenticated" should be eliminated. Thirdly, when an agent signs for or signs on behalf of the master, there is no longer a need for the name of master to be quoted. Fourthly, the terminology "loading on-board or shipped on a named vessel" is changed to "shipped on-board a named vessel." Fifthly, phrases "the rejection of the documents transported only by sail" is removed. Finally, new rule in UCP is the signing of a charter party bill of lading by the charterer or a named agent on behalf of the charterer. My assessment of the revision in UCP 600 is as follows: Because a freight forwarder transport document is a weaker form than a liner bill of lading as collateral, banks may need a secure measure as to protect themselves from such a weak collateral effect. we recognize that Such a weak collateral effect stemmed from the elimination of rules in UCP 500 article 30, and the admission of transport documents issued by the freight forwarder as long as any one besides carrier, shipper, and charterer satisfies the requirements of transport document clauses in UCP 600. Finally, I hope the Commentary on UCP 600 will serve to explain the ambiguities remaining in the new rules.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.45
• /
• pp.111-136
• /
• 2010

Bill of lading means the transport document ("marine", "ocean" or "port-to-port" or similar), however named, covering sea shipment only. Data in a bill of lading, 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 that document, any other stipulated document or the credit, according to UCP 600 and ISBP. This article has provided the general guideline of the discrepancies on the basis of UCP 600, ISBP 681 and the ICC Banking Commission Opinions, for the solution of the unpaid problems of the credit transactions. I have studied especially the ICC Banking Commission Opinions and the DOCDEX Decisions on the bill of lading after UCP 600, the international standard banking practice (ISBP 681), and the recent Korean cases. As such, this article would fill a need gap in the market between the general principles in the UCP provisions and the daily job of the practitioner. The credit practitioners are suggested to this resulting guidance whenever doubts arise as to how to check the credit documents in daily practice.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.70
• /
• pp.1-20
• /
• 2016

This study is to find the accurate interpretations for the UCP600 by integrating, ISBP745, Official Opinions of ICC Banking Commission and some Case Laws suggesting the reasonable implication for the upcoming UCP. Major results analyzed by this study are as follows. First, The preclusion rule, UCP600 Article 16(c), is closely connected with the doctrine of documentary cure, so the banks requirement of Single Notice must state all the discrepancies of the documents presented. Exceptionally if the cured documents by the presenter are happened to be inconsistent the initial notice the bank can require the presenter to re-tender within the expiry date or the last day for presentation. Secondly, The Issuing Bank can utilize the right of seeking a waiver of documentary discrepancies from the applicant with the time limit of 5 banking days. If the bank wants to require an applicant to report discrepancies promptly, he may include a provision in the reimbursement engagement limiting the time limit within which the applicant must give notice of facial discrepancies. Thirdly, if a credit contains a non-documentary condition, banks will deem such condition as not states and will disregard it. According to the principle of private autonony if a credit contains a non-documentary condition to be consistent with by the parties concerned in a credit the non-documentary condition can be treated, as an effective condition itself. Fourthly, according to the Korean Supreme Court's decision, negotiation includes the method of crediting the credit amount and then transfers such funds into a special account and controls the account. Finally, UCP600 Article 33 states a bank has no obligation to accept a presentation outside of its banking hours. However, there is no rule in UCP600 in regard to a presentation after the close of business. Hopefully the upcoming UCP has to stipulates a sort of definite article to determine such ambiguous.

• 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.53
• /
• pp.75-97
• /
• 2012

This study primarily concerns the transfer of letter of credit. A transferable credit is a credit that clearly specifies it is 'transferable' and may be made available in whole or in part to second beneficiary by the request of the first beneficiary. the transfer of the credit is available where the seller as a middleman in intermediate trades purchases from domestic and international supplier. The purpose of this study is to examine the transfer of letter of credit in the UCP600. Having recognized the differences, the study analyzes the transfer of letter of credit under the UCP600 in comparison to those under the ISP98. The ISP98, like the UCP600, stipulates for the requirement of transfer, the number of transfer, conditions of transfer, the replacement of the name of first beneficiary.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.5
• /
• pp.87-114
• /
• 2014

The Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (UCP) is a set of rules on the issuance and use of letters of credit. Historically, the commercial parties, particularly banks, have developed the techniques and methods for handling letters of credit in international trade finance. This practice has been standardized by the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce) by publishing the UCP in 1933 and subsequently updating it throughout the years. The ICC has developed and moulded the UCP by regular revisions, the current version being the UCP600. This latest version, called the UCP600, formally commenced on 1 July 2007. During the revision process, notice was taken of the considerable work that had been completed in creating the International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under Documentary Credits (ISBP), ICC Publication 745. This publication has evolved into a necessary companion to the UCP for determining compliance of documents with the terms of letters of credit. It is the expectation of the Drafting Group and the Banking Commission that the application of the principles contained in the ISBP, including subsequent revisions thereof, will continue during the time UCP 600 is in force. This paper focuses on documents including various certificates, Packing List, Weight List, Beneficiary's Certificate, Analysiis, Inspection, Health, Phytosanitary, Quantity and Quality Certificates, Courier Receipts, Shipping Advice etc. and suggests some implications in the field.

• 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.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.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.119-139
• /
• 2012

In the case of Banque Paribas V. Banco Santander in England for the reimbursement request of deferred payment credit by the nominated bank, the L/C-issuing bank refused to pay the proceeds at maturity because of a fraudulent transaction. The reason of refusal was that the nominated bank, Banco Santander, had no right of payment in deferred credit before its maturity if it made payment of proceeds without notice to the issuing bank, that is, payment not based upon a credit transaction but on its own account. However, in the case of ADIB V. Fortis Bank in America, the New York court made the decision that the deferred payment bank could not refuse to reimburse to the nominated bank, Fortis Bank, because of fraud. Its decision was based on the UCP600. We have analyzed and investigated the above two cases-one was an English court's decision and the other an American's. The English court's decision was made under UCP500, but the American court's was made under UCP600, which was revised in 2007. As a result, we can expect that from now on in deferred payment credit transactions, the power of the nominated bank will be greater than before, but the issuing bank will bear the risk of the beneficiary's fraud, so the issuing bank will be hesitant to issue deferred payment credit. Notwithstanding, we thought that the New York court decision would come into effect in the activation of deferred payment credit in practical trade transactions.