Article 32?
Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:00 am
Dear all,
Need a view or two on a case.
An LC showing partial shipment allowed – and that latest date of shipment is 19.9.2008, also includes the following:
PARTIAL SHIPMENTS MUST BE EFFECTED AS FOLLOWS:
a) ITEMS NO : 8,9,10,12,15,16,18,20,22,23,27,35, 56-62,67,68,72,73,76,87,90,92,93,94,95,96 - IN THREE LOTS BETWEEN THEM SIX MONTHS
b) ITEMS NO:1,2,7,11A,11B,13,14,17,19,21,24-26,28-34,36-38,50-55,63,74,75,77,79,83,84-86 - IN THREE LOTS BETWEEN THEM FOUR MONTHS
c) ITEMS NO:3-6,39-46,48,49,65,71,88,89,97,100,101,102,103,106, 108,109,111,115 - IN TWO LOTS BETWEEN THEM SIX MONTHS
d) ITEMS NO:47,66,112,120,122,123,124 - IN ONE LOT
…
The first shipment effected was “d” – and as it turned out “item 122” was not shipped in full (we were so “lucky” that the full proforma invoice was integrated in the LC showing how many pcs there should be shipped under each item).
This was raised as a discrepancy – and I guess no problem in that (except for the beneficiary of course).
The question is if this LC would be subject to UCP 600 article 32, meaning that the consequence of failing one installment simply means that the LC has “ceased to be available”.
What do you think?
Thanks in advance
Kim
Need a view or two on a case.
An LC showing partial shipment allowed – and that latest date of shipment is 19.9.2008, also includes the following:
PARTIAL SHIPMENTS MUST BE EFFECTED AS FOLLOWS:
a) ITEMS NO : 8,9,10,12,15,16,18,20,22,23,27,35, 56-62,67,68,72,73,76,87,90,92,93,94,95,96 - IN THREE LOTS BETWEEN THEM SIX MONTHS
b) ITEMS NO:1,2,7,11A,11B,13,14,17,19,21,24-26,28-34,36-38,50-55,63,74,75,77,79,83,84-86 - IN THREE LOTS BETWEEN THEM FOUR MONTHS
c) ITEMS NO:3-6,39-46,48,49,65,71,88,89,97,100,101,102,103,106, 108,109,111,115 - IN TWO LOTS BETWEEN THEM SIX MONTHS
d) ITEMS NO:47,66,112,120,122,123,124 - IN ONE LOT
…
The first shipment effected was “d” – and as it turned out “item 122” was not shipped in full (we were so “lucky” that the full proforma invoice was integrated in the LC showing how many pcs there should be shipped under each item).
This was raised as a discrepancy – and I guess no problem in that (except for the beneficiary of course).
The question is if this LC would be subject to UCP 600 article 32, meaning that the consequence of failing one installment simply means that the LC has “ceased to be available”.
What do you think?
Thanks in advance
Kim