transhipment

SOOEYOUNKIM · Post by **SOOEYOUNKIM** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:00 am

Dear

When L/C is silent about transhipment, it means transhipment is allowed or not allowed. I think allowed. but some colleague NO.
UCP 600 have rules for partial shipment and transferable.

In UCP art. 20 c i, A bill of lading may indicate that the goods will or may be transhipped provideded that the entire carriage is covered by one and the same bill of lading.

thanks in advance
regards
eric

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:00 am

Eric,

My view is that if a doc. credit is silent regarding transhipment, then transhipment is allowed. Not only would I adduce -in the case of bills of lading being required- 20(c)(i) to support this view but 20(c)(ii) which allows transhipment to take place in certain (quite common) circumstances even where the credit expressly prohibits transhipment.

Regards, Jeremy

ThuHoangAnh_ · Post by **ThuHoangAnh_** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:00 am

Hi Jeremy,

If we think of the issue in line with the style of UCP 500, we may have a contrary result, i.e., transhipment is not allowed.

UCP 500 Article 6 requires L/C to indicate whether it is revocable or irrevocable, but it also further says that in the absence of such indication the L/C shall be deemed to be irrevocable.

Similarly, if an L/C does not indicate whether transhipment is allowed or not allowed, it may be understood that transhipment is not allowed (?).

In my opinion, provisions in article 20 (b) and (c) are not clear enough to make us understand that transhipment is allowed if such indication is absent from the L/C.

I’m not sure but I think silence does not always mean “yes”.

Best regards,
N.H.Duc

[edited 2/27/2009 6:58:31 AM]

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:00 am

Dear N.H. Duc,

I mean no disrespect but I am afraid I find your reasoning difficult to follow. Certainly I do not see any reason to change the view I expressed above.

Also, I anticipate that the question is somewhat academic anyway given that there are few credits, I imagine, that actually are silent on the question of transhipment. Therefore, I see little to be gained by ‘spilling much ink’ on this matter.

Best regards, Jeremy

GlennRansier_ · Post by **GlennRansier_** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:00 am

Jeremy is correct. When a LC is silent, the UCP default position is that transshipment is acceptable. To quote UCP Article 20: c. (see quotes)

i. A bill of lading "may indicate" that the goods "will" or may be transhipped "provided" that the entire carriage is covered by one and the "same bill of lading".

ii. A bill of lading indicating that "transhipment will or may take place is acceptable", even if the credit prohibits transhipment, if the goods have been shipped in a container, trailer or LASH barge as evidenced by the bill of lading.

ThuHoangAnh_ · Post by **ThuHoangAnh_** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:00 am

Dear Jeremy and Glenn,

As said in my previous post I was not sure of my reasoning. My intention was to provoke more comments from experts like you.

The issue seems to have been clarified now. Thanks for your comments and sorry for any convenience caused.

Best regards,
N.H.Duc