Kim,
"There is no use...", maybe.
In French, we also talk about "le pot de fer contre le pot de terre"
Obviously the Banking Commission is the "iron pot".
I also hope that a B/L showing "Precarriage by truck" is an example NOT requiring the "extended on board notation" ???
Regards
Daniel
ARTICLE 20
-
AsifMahmoodButt
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:21 pm
ARTICLE 20
Hi Daniel,
The example you gave is pretty good but I would assume that since a B/L is called for, there would have to be some vessel/ship mentioned as well as POL. So even if there was pre carriage by truck, the goods would be transported via ship to POD.
Regards
Jason
The example you gave is pretty good but I would assume that since a B/L is called for, there would have to be some vessel/ship mentioned as well as POL. So even if there was pre carriage by truck, the goods would be transported via ship to POD.
Regards
Jason
ARTICLE 20
Jason,
Yes of course, it is: precarriage:by truck - Place of receipt: Xcity -
Ocean vessel: ABC - Port of Loading: DEF.
So in my opinion, in that example,
if the B/L is preprinted "shipped", there is no need for a notation "on board" and if there is one (dated)there is no need to specify the port of loading and name of vessel.
Daniel
Yes of course, it is: precarriage:by truck - Place of receipt: Xcity -
Ocean vessel: ABC - Port of Loading: DEF.
So in my opinion, in that example,
if the B/L is preprinted "shipped", there is no need for a notation "on board" and if there is one (dated)there is no need to specify the port of loading and name of vessel.
Daniel
-
KimChristensen
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:21 pm
ARTICLE 20
Dear Daniel,
I hope that you end up being right – but I do not feel sure about it.
If you look at the coastline newsletter that addresses this issue it is stated that:
Quote
For example, a bill of lading recently seen stated that the shipped on board statement referred to the named vessel OR the conveyance carrying the cargo from the place of receipt (inland point) to the port of loading stated in the bill of lading
Unquote
Note the reference to the “inland point”. So anything is purely speculation, and in that light my previous “prayer” that the various scenarios should be covered by opinions becomes even more relevant.
Best regards
Kim
I hope that you end up being right – but I do not feel sure about it.
If you look at the coastline newsletter that addresses this issue it is stated that:
Quote
For example, a bill of lading recently seen stated that the shipped on board statement referred to the named vessel OR the conveyance carrying the cargo from the place of receipt (inland point) to the port of loading stated in the bill of lading
Unquote
Note the reference to the “inland point”. So anything is purely speculation, and in that light my previous “prayer” that the various scenarios should be covered by opinions becomes even more relevant.
Best regards
Kim
ARTICLE 20
Kim,
Nothing is sure. It is just another example to defend what I could call the "dissident position" about the "place of receipt issue".
Now about customers, it will be a real pleasure to tell them that the article about bill of lading has been clarified and shortened but nevertheless completed by:
-A commentary
-A query
-Some articles in Coastline newsletter
forming (it seems) integral part of the UCP600
Daniel
Nothing is sure. It is just another example to defend what I could call the "dissident position" about the "place of receipt issue".
Now about customers, it will be a real pleasure to tell them that the article about bill of lading has been clarified and shortened but nevertheless completed by:
-A commentary
-A query
-Some articles in Coastline newsletter
forming (it seems) integral part of the UCP600
Daniel
ARTICLE 20
It is indeed pleasing that the 'On-board Recommendations Paper', as I call it, has finaly confirmed the correct position, i.e. that "If the bill of lading only shows a place of receipt, with no reference to the means of pre-carriage, in the pre-carriage or place of receipt fields, an on board notation, or pre-printed wording to that effect can only be seen to apply to the named vessel and port of loading".
It is just a pity that it persists in the nonsense that "a dated on board notation ... is also required when the credit requires shipment to be effected from a port to the place of final destination i.e. the first leg of the journey, as required by the credit, is by sea".
It is just a pity that it persists in the nonsense that "a dated on board notation ... is also required when the credit requires shipment to be effected from a port to the place of final destination i.e. the first leg of the journey, as required by the credit, is by sea".