ICC Digital Library Forum

Searching for an opinion on an unrelated subject, I came across Opinion R225. Whereas Opinion R219 effectively deals with where the Credit does not call for a forwarder’s bill of lading but one is presented, R225 deals with where a credit actually calls for a forwarder’s bill of lading, and -having thought about it - I do not have any reason to disagree with its analysis that:

‘UCP 500 Articles 23 and 30 are subject to the provisions of "unless otherwise stipulated in the Credit" and "unless otherwise authorised in the Credit", respectively. The clause "Forwarder's Bill of Lading acceptable" establishes such a situation and is deemed to allow for a Marine Bill of Lading which is issued by a freight forwarder WITHOUT his signing the document as a carrier or as an agent for, or on behalf of, a named carrier.
Nevertheless, the "Forwarder's Bill of Lading acceptable" contained in a credit that calls for a Marine Bill of Lading, in order to be acceptable, must still comply with the other requirements of UCP 500 Article 23, namely sub-Articles 23(a)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii), (b), (c) and (d)(i)(ii), unless otherwise stipulated in the credit.’ [emphasis added]

Apologies for failing to pick up this at the time.

[edited 9/19/01 2:26:43 PM]

FURTHER CLARIFICATION OF FORWARDER'S B/L

We worry that certain members may not fully understand the quotation of Jeremy in the Conclusion part of ICC Opinion No. R225 that says:

"The Clause 'Forwarder's Bill of Lading acceptable' contained in a credit that calls for a Marine Bill of Lading is deemed to give allowance for a Marine Bill of Lading which is ISSUED by a forwarding agent WITHOUT signing the document as a carrier or as an agent for or on behalf of a named carrier"

They may then wonder how the Forwarder would SIGN OR ISSUE such a Forwader's Marine Bill of Lading, NOT as a carrier or its agent, since a B/L must be signed or issued by either a carrier or its agent?

THE NOTION OF ACTUAL CARRIER AND CONTRACTUAL CARRIER

In the ICC opinion quoted above, the interpretations of "carrier" or "named carrier" are according to "carrier" in the Hague, the Hague/Visby Rules and/or "actual carrier" in the Hamburg Rules.

What it really means is that the "letterhead" of such Forwarder's Bill of Lading is NOT that of the carrier, but that of the Forwarder himself, and the Forwarder signs or issues this Marine Bill of Lading as a "contractual carrier", according to the interpretation of the Hamburg Rules and NOT as an "actual carrier" under this same Rules.

DIFFERENT B/L HEADINGS

The Forwarder is using his own B/L stationery or format (with a heading: ABC Forwarder Co. Ltd.) other than using the B/L stationery or format of the carrier (with a heading: APL, OOCL, Maersk or P&O/Nedlloyd).

We have two carriers in such a B/L, the actual carrier working behind it is APL or OOCL that provides the carrying vessel and takes up the liabilities of an actual carrier, and the contractual carrier is the Forwarder who only takes up a much lighter liability as a contractual carrier.

Such B/L is also called "House Bill of Lading". In fact some such Bs/L do bear the magic word "House Bill of Lading" on their faces.

"Forwarder's Bill of Lading" means "House Bill of Lading". In fact the latter is more clear on the liability of the issuer of such B/L.

A MASTER B/L ISSUED BY A CARRIER TO A FORWARDER TO BACK UP ITS HOUSE BS/L

By using such house B/L, the consignee cannot claim goods directly from the actual carrier. The forwarder or his overseas agent claims the goods with the Master B/L issued by the actual carrier to the forwader and then the consignee in the House B/L would claim goods from the forwarder or his overseas agent at the port of discharge using the House B/L.

FORWARDER MAKES PROFITS BY CONSOLIDATION

The forwarder makes profits by doing consolidation of "part or half of a container" (LCL/CFS) shipments. The actual carrier issues one carrier's or liner's marine B/L for 10 FCL/CY containers to a forwarder who promotes and sells the carrier's cargo spaces with credit payment terms and agency discounts. That is why we see most Bs/L marked Freight Prepaid AS ARRANGED.

There is an interesting story behind this that we learnt from the "kitchen" of a carrier and it is too lengthy to explain here other than in a transport documents workshop.

The forwarder would gain profits by paying the actual carrier with discounted "box rate" and charge the consignees with a higher "GCR" type "weight/measurements ton" rate ("general cargo rate" as used in airfreight other than specific rates). Against one carrier's CY/CY B/L covering 10 containers, the forwarder who does consolidation may issue 20 House FCL/FCL Bs/L each covering half or part of a container.

The forwarder or its overseas agent claims the goods in the CY (container yard) section whereas the consignees claim their goods in the CFS (container freight station) section or the depot of the forwarder or its overseas agent, as the case may be.

The same thing applies to a House Air Waybill.

In a nutshell, sub Article 30 (i) refers to a house B/L whereas sub Article 30 (ii) refers to a liner or carrier B/L signed or issued by a forwarder as an agent of the actual carrier. This statement also applies to a multimodal transport B/L as well as a marine/ocean/port-to-port B/L under sub Article 30.

We hope our detailed explanation above would help certain members to understand the whole set up crystal clear from top to bottom. This is a FAQ from bankers in our workshops.

http://www.tolee.com

[edited 9/19/01 8:47:12 PM]