Dear all, I would like to get your opinion regarding the comparsion of UCP 500 and UCP 600 in terms of non-documentary conditions.
Is there any strict difference between art.13-c of UCP 500 and art. 14-h of UCP 600. In order to state more clearly, as we think about the official ICC opinon no:R-212 1995/96 regarding non-documentary conditions, will the B/L be still discrepant under UCP 600 or not?
non-documentary conditions
-
BilselTatar
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:16 pm
non-documentary conditions
The point is that PP3 is now out.
So, with 600, B/L would be OK even if not mentioning something linking with the B/L but asked in the form of NDC
Daniel
So, with 600, B/L would be OK even if not mentioning something linking with the B/L but asked in the form of NDC
Daniel
-
AsifMahmoodButt
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:21 pm
non-documentary conditions
Hi Daniel
Even though PP3 is out, something similar may come in just as PP3 came in (we live in hope ...). PP3 did make an issue quite clear that a condition cannot be deemed to be a NDC if it can be clearly linked to a doc called for in the credit. In this context if an LC had a condition for shipment to be made by XYZ Line only, would you accept a B/L issued by any other line?
Regards
Jason
Even though PP3 is out, something similar may come in just as PP3 came in (we live in hope ...). PP3 did make an issue quite clear that a condition cannot be deemed to be a NDC if it can be clearly linked to a doc called for in the credit. In this context if an LC had a condition for shipment to be made by XYZ Line only, would you accept a B/L issued by any other line?
Regards
Jason
-
KimChristensen
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:21 pm
non-documentary conditions
Dear Bilsel
Please see my posting today under the topic ”Art 14 f”.
Best regards¨
Kim
Please see my posting today under the topic ”Art 14 f”.
Best regards¨
Kim
non-documentary conditions
Jason,
You could think that I am looking for an escape and it may be so but in your example I would say that the B/L (if required) would be the stipulated document to indicate compliance with the condition. So I am in contradiction with my previous entry...
My turn:
(I put it in another discussion but in the 500 point of view)
document required:CoO
Add. condition: origin France
CoO presented: origin Germany.
Daniel
You could think that I am looking for an escape and it may be so but in your example I would say that the B/L (if required) would be the stipulated document to indicate compliance with the condition. So I am in contradiction with my previous entry...
My turn:
(I put it in another discussion but in the 500 point of view)
document required:CoO
Add. condition: origin France
CoO presented: origin Germany.
Daniel
-
AsifMahmoodButt
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:21 pm
non-documentary conditions
Hi Daniel,
My opinion is the Bene agreed to the original LC for the doc required CoO and the additional condition stating the origin. By presenting a CoO with a different origin, he has violated his agreement and I fail to understand what the bene achieves in doing this. In an L/c, provided all the terms and conditions are complied with and the required docs presented, it is the bene that gets the money. I am quite amused the bene goes free and gets his money for violating his own agreement and Banks have to argue among themselves as to what is correct. I will give another eg. Desc of goods - 50 Kgs of Rice.
LC does not call for W/L.
Addit Condns - max weight per bag is 10KG.
Would you accept any doc presented by the bene that shows the wt of a bag in excess of 10KG?
Regards
Jason
[edited 7/5/2007 3:33:10 PM]
My opinion is the Bene agreed to the original LC for the doc required CoO and the additional condition stating the origin. By presenting a CoO with a different origin, he has violated his agreement and I fail to understand what the bene achieves in doing this. In an L/c, provided all the terms and conditions are complied with and the required docs presented, it is the bene that gets the money. I am quite amused the bene goes free and gets his money for violating his own agreement and Banks have to argue among themselves as to what is correct. I will give another eg. Desc of goods - 50 Kgs of Rice.
LC does not call for W/L.
Addit Condns - max weight per bag is 10KG.
Would you accept any doc presented by the bene that shows the wt of a bag in excess of 10KG?
Regards
Jason
[edited 7/5/2007 3:33:10 PM]
non-documentary conditions
Jason,
Good point too. And we could go on and on and still going round into circles. So, like Kim, I think it will be interesting to know what the Commentary has to say about all this (if it says anything) and be cautious in the meatime.
Daniel
Good point too. And we could go on and on and still going round into circles. So, like Kim, I think it will be interesting to know what the Commentary has to say about all this (if it says anything) and be cautious in the meatime.
Daniel