ISBP 44 (Combined documents)

AlbertB · Post by **AlbertB** » Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:00 am

ISPB 44 indicates that "If a credit requires a packing list and a weight list, such requirement will be satisfied by presentation of two separate documents, or by prsentation of two original copies of a combined packing and weight list, provided such documents states both packing and weight details"

How about if a credit requires a Weight Certificate and Survey Report issued by ABC Company(One requirement) and two separate documents were presented, i.e. One original Weight Certificate and One Survey Reprot.

Albert

KimChristensen · Post by **KimChristensen** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:00 am

Dear Albert,

Sounds like a discussion that have been in the forum: Two Documents Presented in Lieu of One.

You can find it via this link:

http://focus.dcprofessional.com/Dcpro-L ... cator=7.10

Best regards
Kim

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:00 am

Albert

Notwithstanding Kim’s posting above, I shall offer a comment.

If the credit is ‘structured’ as to suggest ‘Weight Certificate and Survey Report issued by ABC Company’ is one document, I believe one must refuse separate documents irrespective of the fact that the applicant is apparently logically no worse off. To quote (from ‘Jack’) Lord Diplock in Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd v Jalsard Pty Ltd:

“The banker is not concerned … as to why the customer [i.e. applicant] called for tender of a document of a particular description.”

KimChristensen · Post by **KimChristensen** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:00 am

Dear Jeremy,

I would not dare to disagree with the honourable Lord Diplock

I would also agree with the principle that you present: If one document is required, presentation of several is ground for a refusal.

My point here (just as in the discussion mentioned) is that it may be difficult to determine whether one or more is actually required.

Best regards
Kim

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:00 am

Kim,

So as to ensure there is not any misunderstanding, I would clarify that my posting was not intended to suggest that I disagreed with what you had said in the other 'thread'.

Jeremy

KimChristensen · Post by **KimChristensen** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:00 am

Jeremy,

No misunderstanding! Think in fact that you were quite right in making the point than when a credit requires one document; the presentation of two is not ok. This did not appear crystal clear from the first thread.

Best regards
Kim

AlbertB · Post by **AlbertB** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:00 am

Thank you all for the comments.

Best regards,
Albert