Certifying occurrence of a future event

GSham · Post by **GSham** » Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:00 am

LC calls for beneficiary's certificate certifying that non-negotiable copies of all stipulated documents have been faxed to the applicant.
Documents presented include such a beneficiary's certificate dated June 8, together with other stipulated documents -- all dated on or before June 8, except a certificate of origin which is dated June 11.
The presentation is non-complying as there is conflict of data between the beneficiary's certificate and certificate of origin in the dates -- how can a certificate issued on June 8 certify faxing of a document that will only be issued on June 11?
Would you agree?

Rgds, Gabriel

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:00 am

ZErsamut · Post by **ZErsamut** » Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:00 am

Hi Gabriel;
I definetely agree with you.
Regards.

jsheehan · Post by **jsheehan** » Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:00 am

agree as well

Shahed · Post by **Shahed** » Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:00 am

See Article 14 d.

SladjanaSkakic · Post by **SladjanaSkakic** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:00 am

I wouldn’t agree.
What I am going to say is that the certificate is on its face in compliance with the L/C requirements and that it is not impossible at all that the beneficiary actually had a copy of certificate of origin already on 08/6, but without that it was dated or signed. It may be dated when the original has been signed, i.e. a couple days later.

The beneficiary’s certificate dated 08. June should not be acceptable IF the L/C requirement was to send PHOTOCOPIES of original documents. In such case it should be an impossible calculation to certify that a PHOTOCOPY of a document dated 11/6 has been sent on 08/6.

GSham · Post by **GSham** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:00 am

In fact the certificate is "on its face" not in compliance because the date appears to be in conflict with the date of the certificate of origin presented. It is irrelevant to the examination of documents under the LC, whether the beneficiary was in possession of an unsigned or undated copy of the certificate of origin on June 8.

Regards, Gabriel

JimBarnes · Post by **JimBarnes** » Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:00 am

What if the certificate of mailing is based on a certificate of origin that was postdated? What is necessarily wrong with a certificate of origin that is dated 3 calendar days after it was signed? If the goods today are from country x won't they still be from country x 3 days from now? I understand the discomfort here but am not convinced there is a "conflict".

Regards, Jim Barnes

GSham · Post by **GSham** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 1:00 am

Jim,
Banks are required to examine the documents to determine whether they appear "on their face" to constitute a complying presentation. Banks are not required or supposed to inquire beyond the documents and therefore it does not matter if the cert of origin is post-dated. From the date of the cert of origin and the date of the beneficiary's cert, it appears that the beneficiary's cert is certifying the dispatch of a document that was yet to be issued. That is where the conflict is.

Regards
Gabriel

JimBarnes · Post by **JimBarnes** » Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:00 am

I start with the notion that a doc examiner should allow for the possibility that the certifier could have sent a post-dated document and that there is no rule against the apparent post-dating of that document (C/O). If so, then I find it awkward to invoke the conflict rule to deal with discomfort over what is either an apparent false certification or an apparent post-dating of a document.

That said, I am generally willing to treat the common reactions of experienced LC bankers as isbp.

Regards, Jim