Article 36 and reimbursement obligation
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 1:00 am
According to article 36, a bank will not, upon resumption of its business, honour or negotiate under a credit that expired during such interruption of its business. Depending on the mode of availability, “honour” means to pay at sight, to incur a deferred payment undertaking and pay at maturity, or to accept a usance draft and pay at maturity. Since article 36 mentions only “honour” and “negotiate”, can I understand it as the issuing bank’s reimbursement obligation is not affected by this article?
For illustration, let us look at a situation where a credit is available by negotiation and its place of expiry is the nominated bank’s counter (not the issuing bank’s counter), and the nominated bank has negotiated a complying presentation two days before expiry and forwarded the documents to the issuing bank. Two days later, an earthquake hits the issuing bank’s location. The issuing bank is closed until after the expiry date. Since article 36 does not apply to reimbursement obligation, the issuing bank is required to reimburse the nominated bank upon resumption of its business.
Would anyone disagree?
Regards, Gabriel
For illustration, let us look at a situation where a credit is available by negotiation and its place of expiry is the nominated bank’s counter (not the issuing bank’s counter), and the nominated bank has negotiated a complying presentation two days before expiry and forwarded the documents to the issuing bank. Two days later, an earthquake hits the issuing bank’s location. The issuing bank is closed until after the expiry date. Since article 36 does not apply to reimbursement obligation, the issuing bank is required to reimburse the nominated bank upon resumption of its business.
Would anyone disagree?
Regards, Gabriel