ICC Digital Library Forum

An LC requires a certificate of origin (in one original and one copy) evidencing that goods are of European origin issued and authenticated by chamber of commerce in the exporting country.
The certificate of origin issued by the Arab-British Chamber of Commerce indicating that the goods originated in "United Kingdom, slovenia, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany". The certificate of origin also detailed the names, places and countries (which were consistent with the countries mentioned above) of the manufacturers of the goods.
The confirming bank raised the following (only) discrepancy: "Cert. of Origin issued in the country of origin of the goods (exporting country) only for a part of the same goods (United Kingdom).
When contacted the confirming bank insisted that there must be a separate certificate of origin for each and every country of origin.
Any comments to the above????

From what country or countries were the goods exported (as distinguished from originated) per the documents presented?

Thanks for your response.
Shipment was effected from Rotterdam, Netherlands to Benghazi Port Libya.
The Consignor on the Certificate of Origin was Company A located in the UK on behalf of and for account of Company B (Beneficiary of the LC). The Certificate of origina was issued by the Arab-British Chamber of Commerce in the UK.

ISBP Para 21 (d) says than an LC should not use "exporting country", but if the term is used it means the country where the beneficiary is domiciled or the country of origin or....".

I deduce from this that the term is considered ambiguous and that the beneficiary gets the benefit of doubt. Which is as it should be.

Caveat: In the most recent DCI, my friend Don Smith wrote: "I know of only one lawyer who could effectively examine trade documents, and I doubt he/she (to keep all you lawyers guessing) could examine more than four sets a day."

Regards, Jim Barnes

As usual, Jim Barnes (my friend), is correct.

thanks Jim and Don however to be honest I do not find para 21d confusing at all......on second thoughts this is only from the view of a 'simple' LC practitioner.
It would be also good to hear the views of those who manage to check at least five sets of docs a day

I think I would struggle to examine more than a couple of presentations a day given what a dreadful job this is! (For what it is worth I think examining documents is the worst job by far in ‘trade’ operations, if not banking in general; among other things it is very very boring indeed.) Thus while I accept I cannot meet RenaldT’s requirements I nonetheless advance my views.

With respect to para 21 of ISBP681 if the beneficiary is ‘domiciled’ in the UK the credit requirements have been met. If not, by reason of there being multiple countries of origin the C/O fails in my opinion to meet the other ‘limbs’ of para 21 (the country of origin of the goods (which is not the UK alone), the country of receipt by the carrier (the Netherlands presumably) and the country from which shipment or dispatch is made (the Netherlands)) and -as a result- is not compliant.


[edited 11/14/2008 12:30:42 PM]
[edited 11/14/2008 12:40:17 PM]

Thankyou however I fail to understand your interpretation of Para 21. My understanding of this para is that if a term such as 'exporting country' is used this will be mean that it can either be the country of the beneficiary is domiciled OR the country of origin of the goods OR the country of receipt by the Carrier OR the country from which shipment is made. If the domicle of the beneficiary is the UK and the certificate of origin has been issued in the UK then in my view the docs are compliant.

I agree. That is why I said ‘if the beneficiary is ‘domiciled’ in the UK the credit requirements have been met’. I said ‘if’ as nowhere do you say -as far as I can see- where the beneficiary is domiciled.