I received a credit containing the above clause & would like to hear your members' comments on this.
When a credit (not transferable) mentioned 'Third party documents acceptable', does it mean that the issuers of the documents called for can be someone other than the beneficiary e.g. invoices, fax advices,etc.
Does this include drafts i.e. can someone else other than the beneficiary draw drafts?
Could the clause also mean that documents could be made out to someone other than the applicant?
Thank you.
Third party docs
Third party docs
"THIRD PARTY DOCUMENTS" IS A TERM DISCOURAGED BY THE ICC BANKING COMMISSION AS ITS MEANING IS UNCLEAR AND VARIES FROM ONE TRADE TO ANOTHER.
HTTP://WWW.TOLEE.COM
[edited 10/12/01 5:28:37 AM]
HTTP://WWW.TOLEE.COM
[edited 10/12/01 5:28:37 AM]
Third party docs
I would observe, without any responsibility on my part, that there is not any UCP500 requirement for any document:
1. To be issued by the beneficiary, except invoices (sub-Article 37a(i)) and possibly drafts (Article 9). Therefore unless a credit/UCP500 otherwise stipulates, documents (e.g. packing list or weight list) may be issued by any party.
2. To show the beneficiary as ‘shipper’, ‘exporter’, ‘consignor’ etc. Therefore unless a credit otherwise stipulates, any document (e.g. certificate of origin or transport document) that shows a party other than the beneficiary as ‘shipper’, ‘exporter’, ‘consignor’ etc is not (automatically) discrepant. For example it is not (automatically) inconsistent -per sub-Article 13a- with the other documents.
[edited 10/12/01 2:34:33 PM: it did not make sense!]
1. To be issued by the beneficiary, except invoices (sub-Article 37a(i)) and possibly drafts (Article 9). Therefore unless a credit/UCP500 otherwise stipulates, documents (e.g. packing list or weight list) may be issued by any party.
2. To show the beneficiary as ‘shipper’, ‘exporter’, ‘consignor’ etc. Therefore unless a credit otherwise stipulates, any document (e.g. certificate of origin or transport document) that shows a party other than the beneficiary as ‘shipper’, ‘exporter’, ‘consignor’ etc is not (automatically) discrepant. For example it is not (automatically) inconsistent -per sub-Article 13a- with the other documents.
[edited 10/12/01 2:34:33 PM: it did not make sense!]