ISBP, ICC Publication No.465

VijayalakshmiK · Post by **VijayalakshmiK** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 12:00 am

Would it be correct or acceptable to quote extracts from ISBP, ICC Pub No.465 in defense of any position banks may take in case of a dispute(re the discrepant nature of documents)?

StankaJurca · Post by **StankaJurca** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 12:00 am

Yes, it would!

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 12:00 am

I can’t trace a publication ‘465’. What is it? (Presumably ISBP, as recently adopted in Rome, will be in the 500/600 series when it is finally published?)

DimitriScoufaridis · Post by **DimitriScoufaridis** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:00 am

Jeremy,
The correct publication no. for ISBP is 645. The number was probably misquoted by the initiator of this posting.

Dimitri

VijayalakshmiK · Post by **VijayalakshmiK** » Mon Feb 03, 2003 12:00 am

Apologies for misquoting the publication number, it is indeed 645 and is seen in the icc bookstore. I have seen one affirmitive response. Do all of us agree?

StankaJurca · Post by **StankaJurca** » Tue Feb 04, 2003 12:00 am

Still affirmative.
Publication No. 465 was taken as clear typing error!

PavelA · Post by **PavelA** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 12:00 am

Dear Vijayalakshmi,
It would be both correct and acceptable to quote ISBP in possible disputes re. discrepancies as defence. However proper understanding of the rules is crucial. I hope that ISBP will be followed worldwide.

Best Regards,

Pavel Andrle
[edited 2/5/03 12:06:03 PM]

larryBacon · Post by **larryBacon** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 12:00 am

As in many matters concerning DCs, it is a matter of interpretation. Situations arose where the UCP was being misinterpreted. In my opinion, some of these were due to a genuine mistake (English not being first language, poor wording of DC etc), while others were deliberately misinterpreted to suit the preference of the applicant, bene or bank concerned.

ISBP is an attempt to facilitate and demonstrate how to keep to the "straight and narrow" of UCP, but there are none so blind as those who will not see. It is, perhaps, too early to say, but I predict that some will attempt to use their interpretation of ISBP to overturn UCP when it suits them.

Laurence

hatemshehab · Post by **hatemshehab** » Wed Feb 26, 2003 12:00 am

I believe the question that ISBP begets is that “ what if we encounter a letter of credit stating that it is subject to UCP 500 and ISBP 645” OR “this L/C is subject to UCP 500 and any dispute arising from its interpretation will be subject to ISBP 645”

Although these are imaginary scenarios I wonder what would be the course of action in these cases?

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Thu Feb 27, 2003 12:00 am

Hatem,

Firstly, hope you’re well.

Secondly, I do not see the problem as by virtue of being subject to UCP500 a credit is -or at least ought to be considered to be- automatically also ‘subject’ to ISBP. In other words, the addition of a reference to ISBP changes -or at least ought to change- nothing. Therefore, given this, banks will be faced with the conundrum of what to do where ISBP conflicts with UCP500 (as it undoubtedly does), whether or not there is a reference to ISBP in the credit. That is unless the wise issuing bank has already anticipated the problem and covered it in the credit terms.

Regards, Jeremy
[edited 2/27/03 9:19:00 AM]