export certificate/licence are they one and the same

lucettelessard · Post by **lucettelessard** » Wed Nov 07, 2001 12:00 am

If the credit asks for an export certificate and a licence is presented are they to be considered one and the same or should a discrepancy be called being that the document is not entitled as required in the credit

hatemshehab · Post by **hatemshehab** » Fri Nov 09, 2001 12:00 am

Generally speaking and if I were in your shows I would be more interseted in the contents rather than the title. This from common sense point of view.

MarkColeman · Post by **MarkColeman** » Mon Nov 12, 2001 12:00 am

Along the same lines, if an L/C asked for and insurance policy but an insurance certificate was presented, would that be accepted?

hatemshehab · Post by **hatemshehab** » Mon Nov 12, 2001 12:00 am

NO. that is a different issue. insurance policy is not the same as insurance certificate. Each document serve a different purpose.

T.O.Lee · Post by **T.O.Lee** » Mon Nov 12, 2001 12:00 am

Dear Members,

We are now back from Frankfurt ICC Banking Commission meetings.

CONTENT V. TITLE

The notation of "The content of a document is more important than its title" shold not be abused and generalised too much.

COMMON SENSE RULE V. MATERIAL IMPACT TO UNDERLYING TRANSACTION

Document examination is an art. Common sense rule is to be applied but in determination of discrepancies the bank should also consider whether or not there is any material impact to the underlying transaction.

http://www.tolee.com

[edited 11/12/01 10:40:26 PM]

hatemshehab · Post by **hatemshehab** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:00 am

Welcome back Mr. Lee, we have been missing you inhere.

larryBacon · Post by **larryBacon** » Tue Dec 18, 2001 12:00 am

One critical piece of information is missing here. Does the credit indicate who should issue the export certificate ? If, for example, it calls for issue by a government (licensing) authority, a licence may be acceptable, depending on the content called for.

If a party is nominated to issue such certificate, then that is the only party which can issue a valid certificate.

Laurence

LjubicaHolik · Post by **LjubicaHolik** » Sun Jan 13, 2002 12:00 am

I consider that discrepant document is presented because the document is not entitled as required.
What do you think about case when instead of "factory certificate"(as required) "factory attest" is presented?
Ljubica Holik, Yugoslavia

larryBacon · Post by **larryBacon** » Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:00 am

Personally I would accept a signed "factory attest" in lieu of a "factory certificate", but I would not fault a bank for regarding it as discrepant using the "strict compliance" rule.

Laurence