ICC Digital Library Forum

An LC REQUIRES original Bs/L "marked freight payable as per Charter Party". The BL presented complies with the LC and with Article 22 but since the LC does not specifically state that charter party Bs/L are acceptable, a discrepancy is noted that "charter party BL presented".
Is this a correct position? It seems to me that by requiring a BL marked "freight payable as per charter party" the LC is in fact requiring presentation of a CP BL. Comments are appreciated. Thanks

Hi,

The inclusion in the bill of lading of “freight payable as per charter party” is an indication that the bill of lading was issued subject to a charter party (see R647/TA662rev).

I agree with you that by requiring a bill of lading marked "freight payable as per charter party" the LC is in fact requiring presentation of a Charter Party Bill of Lading.

Regards,
N.H.Duc

[edited 5/20/2010 8:06:43 AM]

Requiring a BL "marked freight payable as per Charter Party" can only mean that a CPBL has to be presented. Therefore, there is not a scintilla of merit in the 'discrepancy'.

See also R578
Daniel

While not required to do so, it would have been helpful had the advising bank clarified the inconsistency of an LC requiring a Ocean BL and then requiring a statement that "freight payable per CP". It would have taken the guesswork out of it. I do not believe that the opinions mentioned cover the details described in this instance. In general it should not be a discrepancy but it is really poor issuance and these have led to interesting court decisions. Better to get the clarification and/or amendment up-front before presenting documents.