ISBP Article 123

General questions regarding UCP 600
Post Reply
jsheehan
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:20 pm

ISBP Article 123

Post by jsheehan » Thu May 14, 2009 1:00 am

Would appreciate comments on the above article. Especially the last sentence which says "an endorsement indicating that it is made for or on behalf of the shipper is acceptable".

Does it mean that anyone, bank, trader,etc, can blank endorse the BL on behalf of the shipper if the shipper omits to endorse the BL? Thanks
ThuHoangAnh_
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:28 pm

ISBP Article 123

Post by ThuHoangAnh_ » Fri May 15, 2009 1:00 am

Hi,

I think the party that endorses the B/L on behalf of the shipper should be the party that is authorized by the shipper to do so. However, banks will accept the B/L that is endorsed by any party provided that the endorsement is made in accordance with ISBP para. 77, 102 and 123, i.e. indicating it is made for or on behalf of the shipper. The party that makes endorsement without the shipper’s authorization will be liable for his act in case of any dispute in connection with the carrier’s delivery of the goods against such an endorsed B/L.

Best regards,
N. H. Duc
GlennRansier_
Posts: 132
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:19 pm

ISBP Article 123

Post by GlennRansier_ » Fri May 15, 2009 1:00 am

Hi John,
ICC does not dictate or regulate individual legal positions and understands that countries laws differ and that those laws overrule the ICC rules. As you know, I am not an attorney. However, in general, in the US, your company can provide someone with authority to sign BL's on your company's behalf via a Limited Power of Attorney. The party signing would then sign as "attorney in fact" on behalf of your company. A bank can ask for proof if the endorser is not the stated BL "shipper". You can check with your legal professionals as to what they believe is the correct approach.
Best Regards
Post Reply