ICC Digital Library

Documentary Credit World

  2. Trade Finance
  3. Documentary Credit World
  4. February 2024 Vol. 28 No.2
Documentary Credit World (DCW) - February 2024 Vol. 28 No. 2 section - Updates

One New, One Re-Submitted Draft ICC Opinion for April 2024 Session

Two Draft Opinions will be addressed at the next session of ICC Banking Commission’s quarterly discussion of Opinions on 9 April 2024. The Draft Opinions were released in February 2024 to ICC National Committees for review and comment by 26 March.

Draft Opinion TA935rev, re-submitted following the January 2024 Opinion session, involves a query about an issuing bank raising as a discrepancy a presented bill of lading showing ‘CAT LAI PORT’ as place of delivery instead of as port of discharge without notation evidencing that port of discharge is ‘CAT LAI PORT’. The initial Draft Opinion concluded that the discrepancy is not valid, but following receipt of written comments from ICC National Committees (NCs) and reassessment, the ICC Banking Commission Technical Advisory Team determined the discrepancy is valid.

The Opinion centers on interpretation of ISBP 821 Paragraph E8(b). According to information provided by ICC with its February 2024 release, “the Opinion was (initially) drafted to assess how NCs wish to proceed with this topic and whether ISBP 821 E8 (b) needs to be expanded or not...In this respect, a possible amendment to ISBP 821 paragraph E8 (b) would need to be part of the revision / update process discussion for ISBP.” ICC went on to emphasize that: “The Opinion must reflect the practice stated in ISBP paragraphs E8 (a) and (b).”

Draft Opinion TA940 deals with a query sent by ICC Denmark regarding a local demand guarantee supporting an underlying agreement stating that a drawing can be made against unpaid invoices in excess of 90 days from the invoice date. The guarantor rejected the beneficiary’s demand, citing three discrepancies relating to the dating and guarantee number of the invoice copies and mention of payment terms in the invoice copies. The query asked if the discrepancies are valid. In addressing the query, the Draft Opinion assumes the guarantee required invoice copy(ies) to accompany the demand.

  

ISBP 821 Paragraph E8 (Port of discharge)

E8)
  1. The named port of discharge, as required by the credit, should appear in the port of discharge field within a bill of lading.
  2. However, the named port of discharge may be stated in the field headed "Place of final destination" or words of similar effect provided there is a notation evidencing that the port of discharge is that stated under "Place of final destination" or words of similar effect. For example, when a credit requires shipment to be effected to Felixstowe, but Felixstowe is shown as the place of final destination instead of the port of discharge, this may be evidenced by a notation stating "Port of discharge Felixstowe".