ICC Digital Library Forum

Dear colleague!

I would appreciate to receive your comments on the following matter.

We, as advising bank, received L/C from a spanish bank with, among others, following terms:

QUOTE
41D Available With … By
ADVISING BANK
BY PAYMENT

Field No. 43P Partial Shipments
PARTIAL SHIPMENTS ARE ALLOWED

Field No. 44D Shipment Period
+ 1ST SHIPMENT LATEST DATE 05.OCT.2006
(DELIVERIES N: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-11-14 AND 17)
+ 2ND SHIPMENT LATEST DATE 16.OCT.2006 (DELIVERIES N: 16)
+ 3RD SHIPMET LATEST DATE 06.NOV.2006 (DELIVERIES N: 10 AND 13)
+ 4TH SHIPMENT LATEST DATE 15.NOV.2006 (DELIVERIES N: 12 AND 15)

Field No. 45A
Description of Goods and/or Services
+GOODS AND DETAILS AS PER PROFORMA INVOICE N. XXXXX 03.08.06
+DELIVERY TERMS: CPT XXXXXX, XXXX
UNQUOTE

1st Presentation of documents:
Documents presented under stipulated 1st shipment.
Invoice shows actual shipment as:
QUOTE
1ST SHIPMENT LATEST DATE 05.OCT.2006
(DELIVERIES N: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9)
UNQUOTE

with following description of goods:
QUOTE
GOODS AND DETAILS AS PER PROFORMA INVOICE N. XXXXX 03.08.06
DELIVERY TERMS: CPT XXXXXX, XXXX
UNQUOTE

2nd Presentation of documents:
Invoice shows actual shipment of remaining goods under stipulated 1st shipment as:
QUOTE
1ST SHIPMENT LATEST DATE 05.OCT.2006
(DELIVERIES N: 1-2-3-4-6-7-8-9-11-14-17)
UNQUOTE

with following description of goods:
QUOTE
GOODS AND DETAILS AS PER PROFORMA INVOICE N. XXXXX 03.08.06
DELIVERY TERMS: CPT XXXXXX, XXXX
UNQUOTE

Question:
Is term PARTIAL SHIPMENT ARE ALLOWED enough as regards stiplulation in Field No. 44D Shipment Period, specifying four shipments with relative deliveries. In above two presentations we have two shipments making 2nd shipment termed in L/C 3rd shipment.

We took position that partial shipments are not allowed within certain partial shipment stipulated in L/C and that there is a need in L/C terms for an additional clause that partial shipments are also allowed within each of four stipulated partial shipments.

Upon receipt of MT734 Advice of Refusal from the issuing bank of the following contents:

QUOTE
77J Discrepancies
INVOICES DESCRIPTION OF GOODS NOT SHOWING DELIVERIES AS PER LC TERMS
77B Disposal of Documents
/HOLD/HOLD
UNQUOTE

we were sure that issuing bank took the same position.
But it seems it was not the case – see 3rd presentation.


3rd Presentation of documents:
Documents presented evidence actual shipment, shown on invoice as:
QUOTE
2ND SHIPMENT (DELIVERIES N:16)
UNQUOTE

with following description of goods
QUOTE
GOODS AND DETAILS AS PER PROFORMA INVOICE N. XXXXX 03.08.06
DELIVERY TERMS: CPT XXXXXX, XXXX.
UNQUOTE

Upon presentation of documents to the issuing bank, we received from them MT734 Advice of Refusal of the following contents:

QUOTE
77J Discrepancies
INVOICES DESCRIPTION OF GOODS NOT SHOWING DELIVERIES AS PER LC TERMS
77B Disposal of Documents
/HOLD/HOLD
UNQUOTE

Question: Was issuing bank justified to refuse the documents under 3rd presentation, or not?

I thank you in advance for your comments.

Best regards,

Bojan Zidar

[edited 10/27/2006 3:14:56 PM]

Dear Bojan,
you already had 2 shipments i/o one for the deliveries mentioned under 1st shipment. so, it comes the 3rd shipment with delivery no.16.,invoice indicating "2nd shipment".
this is what i consider to be discrepant.
but goods description isn't discrepant.
so,i would like to know what issuing bank had in mind.
you may reject the discrepancy stating that goods description on invoice is strictly as per field 45A and see what issuing bank reply to you.
if they had in mind shipments period they did not properly point the issue.
nice week end to you and good luck.
bogdan.

Dear Bogdan,

Thank you for your reply.

The issuing bank is silent and we are still awaiting to receive their reply to our 3 Swift messages, rejecting their refusal.

We are also anxious to receive their clarification but all our Swift messages has remained without any reply.

Nice week end also to you,

Bojan