I agree that banks are not responsible to check the terms and conditions on the reverse of the bill of lading except the endorsement if any. However, I think prudent banks will not accept the endorsement on the bill of lading which expressly states (though on the reverse) that it is a non-negotiable bill of lading.
Regards,
N.H. Duc
Non-Negotiable B/L
-
HOANGTHIANHTHU_invalid
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:15 pm
Non-Negotiable B/L
Jim,
While I accept that there is an argument to say that there is conflict with an implied credit requirement, I see no basis for invoking 14(d). (I do not see that there is data conflict within the document itself.) This is because -if the argument is correct- a ‘positive’ condition of the credit has been breached. The position (if this is a discrepancy) is essentially no different from where a credit requires an insurance policy and an insurance certificate is presented instead. One would certainly not invoke 14(d) then. To me, if there is a discrepancy, it would have to be expressed along the lines of: ‘The credit requires negotiable bills of lading whereas non-negotiable bills of lading have been presented.’
Regards, Jeremy
[edited 12/7/2009 9:07:27 AM]
While I accept that there is an argument to say that there is conflict with an implied credit requirement, I see no basis for invoking 14(d). (I do not see that there is data conflict within the document itself.) This is because -if the argument is correct- a ‘positive’ condition of the credit has been breached. The position (if this is a discrepancy) is essentially no different from where a credit requires an insurance policy and an insurance certificate is presented instead. One would certainly not invoke 14(d) then. To me, if there is a discrepancy, it would have to be expressed along the lines of: ‘The credit requires negotiable bills of lading whereas non-negotiable bills of lading have been presented.’
Regards, Jeremy
[edited 12/7/2009 9:07:27 AM]
Non-Negotiable B/L
I wonder now if TA680rev wouild be relevant in our case
Daniel
Daniel
Non-Negotiable B/L
Jeremy,
I can't say you are wrong, but if I were advising a bank that decided to refuse, I would recommend including 14(d) data conflicts as reasons for the refusal.
A court might resist enforcing an "implied credit requirement" and more easily accept that a non-negotiability recital in a BL is data; that it conflicts with data in the credit (an express credit term requiring a BL issued to the shipper's order and blank endorsed); and that it also conflicts with other data in the BL (provisions showing issuance to the shipper's order and blank endorsed).
Regards, Jim
I can't say you are wrong, but if I were advising a bank that decided to refuse, I would recommend including 14(d) data conflicts as reasons for the refusal.
A court might resist enforcing an "implied credit requirement" and more easily accept that a non-negotiability recital in a BL is data; that it conflicts with data in the credit (an express credit term requiring a BL issued to the shipper's order and blank endorsed); and that it also conflicts with other data in the BL (provisions showing issuance to the shipper's order and blank endorsed).
Regards, Jim