courier receipt

[POLTERD.]

hi everyone.
i have the following case:
l/c states,under 46B,that one set of copies of all docs to be sent to applicant by dhl and the original dhl awb to be presented.
also,under 47B l/c states that all docs must be issued "in the name of issuing bank for account of applicant".
dhl awb has been presented showing as consignee the applicant.
1st advising bank rejected docs because the dhl awb doesn't evidence issuing bank as consignee.
i don't think the discrepancy is valid.
i'd appreciate your opinions.
regards,
bogdan.

[NigelHolt]

Bogdan,

I share your views.

Setting aside the question of what exactly is meant by the ‘general condition’ that ‘all docs must be issued "in the name of issuing bank for account of applicant"*’, it is only logical that the specific requirement that that one set of copy documents are to be sent to the applicant by DHL must override this general requirement. Furthermore, if the credit requires a beneficiary’s certificate then the supporting courier’s receipt may well form part of the ‘same documentary requirement’. For the relevance of this see Opinion TA583rev. If the certificate meets the requirement of the ‘general condition’ then based on this opinion the courier receipt need not.

* The invoice, for example, must be addressed to the issuing bank but state it is for account of the applicant?

Regards, Jeremy

[POLTERD.]

Thank you Jeremy.
The invoice must also be issued in the name of iss.bank and for account of applicant.
(it's a middle east l/c).
Best regards to you,
Bogdan

[RolandLeupi]

I have seen such cases with South African banks. They have participations in some companies and I don't know the reason why but much probably for legal reasons need the documentation issued at their names, included the invoice.
I would therefore have preferred the DHL receipt showing the bank as consignee instead of the applicant as requested.
Roland

[RolandLeupi]

sorry read well at the end..............
.........of the applicant as presented instead of requested
Roland

[POLTERD.]

Dear Roland,
I thank you for your opinion but in mine the dhl awb is ok because, as requested under l/c,must only prove that one set of copies of the original docs requested and presented under l/c has been sent by the bnf directly to applicant.
how else can a dhl awb prove this action if not by evidencing the applicant as the consignee ?
we're not talking about someone for account of somebody else but only about a clear designated party to whom something must be sent by courier.
of course, i should have asked for clarifications since the moment i received the l/c but now is too late.
if under consignee box of dhl awb would be written issuing bank for account of named applicant, to whom would dhl send the docs copies ? and how would a such issued dhl awb prove that the docs copies have been sent to applicant ?
regards,
bogdan

[RolandLeupi]

Dear Bogdan,
Logically speaking your way of thinking is perfect...........with however clause like you were mentioning even easy thing may become ambiguous.
Roland