Laurence,
I believe all three courts’ judgements are available on BAILLI.
At the risk of ‘going on forever’ on this subject, where is the requirement that a document examiner determine if a document presented to meet the requirement for a ‘bill of lading’ appears, IN LAW, actually to be a B/L? There certainly does not appear to be such a requirement in the UCP. On the face of it (!), provided the requirements of Article 23 are met the terms of the credit have been complied with.
Jeremy
Bill of Lading - clause 'if reqired by the carrier...'
-
larryBacon
- Posts: 689
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:26 pm
Bill of Lading - clause 'if reqired by the carrier...'
Jeremy,
I agree that Art. 23 must be complied with to determine this issue, and in that context, Art. 23 a iv calls for at least one B/L, but without defining what that is. Therefore, at its most basic level, the document checker must determine that the document presented "appears to be" a B/L. He may get clues in favour of determining it to be a B/L such as being named "Bill of Lading", but this is not conclusive or comprehensive. He may also get clues contrary to this, such as "Carrier reserves the right to release goods to consignee without presentation of original B/L".
He then must weigh up the pro and contra evidence to determine if the document "appears to be" a B/L. This determination is made under the UCP, not law. The determination by law may vary from country to country, but hopefully the determination by UCP is more consistent.
Laurence
I agree that Art. 23 must be complied with to determine this issue, and in that context, Art. 23 a iv calls for at least one B/L, but without defining what that is. Therefore, at its most basic level, the document checker must determine that the document presented "appears to be" a B/L. He may get clues in favour of determining it to be a B/L such as being named "Bill of Lading", but this is not conclusive or comprehensive. He may also get clues contrary to this, such as "Carrier reserves the right to release goods to consignee without presentation of original B/L".
He then must weigh up the pro and contra evidence to determine if the document "appears to be" a B/L. This determination is made under the UCP, not law. The determination by law may vary from country to country, but hopefully the determination by UCP is more consistent.
Laurence
Bill of Lading - clause 'if reqired by the carrier...'
Laurence,
To bring matters to a close, I hope -& believe- that what you are expecting goes beyond the what are considered to be the responsibilities of a document examiner.
Jeremy
To bring matters to a close, I hope -& believe- that what you are expecting goes beyond the what are considered to be the responsibilities of a document examiner.
Jeremy
-
larryBacon
- Posts: 689
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:26 pm
Bill of Lading - clause 'if reqired by the carrier...'
Jeremy,
I understand your reservations, but do not agree with them. Subconsciously, if not consciously, the checker upon reading "Bill of Lading" ticks off a box in his mind that this is a B/L as required in Art 23 for example. The question is "Is this as far as he need go in determining compliance with this requirement ?"
When we consider that we already know that the document need not be named "Bill of Lading" to be a B/L, we must conclude that there is more to checking for the B/L requirement than looking at the title. I am not suggesting that the checker be an expert in law or transport, but that he have a basic knowledge enabling him to make the judgement necessary in differentiating, for example, between a B/L & SWB.
Laurence
I understand your reservations, but do not agree with them. Subconsciously, if not consciously, the checker upon reading "Bill of Lading" ticks off a box in his mind that this is a B/L as required in Art 23 for example. The question is "Is this as far as he need go in determining compliance with this requirement ?"
When we consider that we already know that the document need not be named "Bill of Lading" to be a B/L, we must conclude that there is more to checking for the B/L requirement than looking at the title. I am not suggesting that the checker be an expert in law or transport, but that he have a basic knowledge enabling him to make the judgement necessary in differentiating, for example, between a B/L & SWB.
Laurence