Bill of lading

General questions regarding UCP 600
Post Reply
PhanThanhNhan
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:23 pm

Bill of lading

Post by PhanThanhNhan » Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:00 am

Dear all.
Pls give us yr opinion or any relating ICC opinions for the following case:
-Is is discrepant if B/L signed:
ABC as carrier
XYZ signed as agent
We consider it is discrepant because B/L doesn't show XYZ as agent for the carrier or not
Thanks
PhanThanhNhan
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:23 pm

Bill of lading

Post by PhanThanhNhan » Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:00 am

Pls give your advice for the above situation!
Regards,
PTN
HOANGTHIANHTHU_invalid
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:15 pm

Bill of lading

Post by HOANGTHIANHTHU_invalid » Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:00 am

Agent in this context is understood as agent for the named carrier.
I’ll accept the B/L

Regards,
Duc N.H
KBalasubramanian
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:13 pm

Bill of lading

Post by KBalasubramanian » Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:00 am

Hello,

I believe we can accept if stated within the same box as the agent is intending to act on behalf of the carrier.
ANH TUYETL
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:28 pm

Bill of lading

Post by ANH TUYETL » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:00 am

Dear PTN
I agree that the BL is discrepant, despite the fact that the signature is included in one box. and in this case, the context does not help to determine that the agent has signed for the carrier (in fact, we can assume he may sign for the master).
Regards
Luu Anh Tuyet
PhanThanhNhan
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:23 pm

Bill of lading

Post by PhanThanhNhan » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:00 am

Hi all,
Thanks so much for your comments so far. However, in order to make sure whether it is discrepant or not, pls raise any offical reference for this case (or similar case, if any).
Best regards,
PTN
DanielD
Posts: 538
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:16 pm

Bill of lading

Post by DanielD » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:00 am

Art. 20 a i in fine and the Commentary page 90 in fine and 91 in initio
Regards
Daniel
ANH TUYETL
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:28 pm

Bill of lading

Post by ANH TUYETL » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:00 am

Dear PTN
I am now totally sure that the given B/L is discrepant. Pls refer to Publication "Frequently Asked Questions under UCP600" by Gary Collyer, volume VII, question 20.7
Quote: "the UCP, in art 20, imposes three basic requirements: 1-naming of the carrier, 2-siging by the carrier , master or their agent and, 3- that if an agent signs they must state the capacity in which they are siging, i.e., as agent of whom.
In the example, 1 and 2 are achieved but 3 is NOT
Unquote
Pls note that the example is exactly the same as your case.If you need more information, pls contact me
Regards
Anh Tuyet
[edited 12/16/2010 4:24:24 PM]
Post Reply