is this term equivalent to "shipped on board" or "on board", etc.
is there a differece in meaning or outcome?
thanks and regards.
clean on board b/l
-
johnmarcow
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:20 pm
clean on board b/l
“Shipped on board”, “Loaded on board”, “Laden on board”, “Clean on bard” or “On board”.
From common sense point of view, these words should achieve the same effect when they appear in a BL. There should be no other different meaning than “placing the cargoes on board the carrying vessel”.
In the ISBP, under Articles 82 and 83, it states:
“Shipped on board”, “Shipped in apparent good order”, “Laden on board”, “Clean on board” OR OTHER PHRASES incorporating words such as “shipped” or “on board” have the same effect as “shipped on board”. This is according to ICC Opinion TA 465 rev.
If one tries to be articulate or precise, the term "goods" should be called "cargoes" in a transport document such as a BL or an AWB. However, in a commercial invoice, the term "cargoes" should not be used, as they should be called "goods".
The same happens to "shipper" v. "seller/beneficiary" and "consignee" v. "buyer/applicant". That is why the consignee in a BL can be different than the consignee in a certificate of origin, as the term “consignee”, being a transport term, should not be used in the certificate of origin in the first place. ISBP Article 199 addresses to this issue and does not deem this to be a valid discrepancy.
We always promote the concept of “Right Data in the Right Document” in our workshops.
www.tolee.com
[edited 11/13/02 5:51:20 PM]
From common sense point of view, these words should achieve the same effect when they appear in a BL. There should be no other different meaning than “placing the cargoes on board the carrying vessel”.
In the ISBP, under Articles 82 and 83, it states:
“Shipped on board”, “Shipped in apparent good order”, “Laden on board”, “Clean on board” OR OTHER PHRASES incorporating words such as “shipped” or “on board” have the same effect as “shipped on board”. This is according to ICC Opinion TA 465 rev.
If one tries to be articulate or precise, the term "goods" should be called "cargoes" in a transport document such as a BL or an AWB. However, in a commercial invoice, the term "cargoes" should not be used, as they should be called "goods".
The same happens to "shipper" v. "seller/beneficiary" and "consignee" v. "buyer/applicant". That is why the consignee in a BL can be different than the consignee in a certificate of origin, as the term “consignee”, being a transport term, should not be used in the certificate of origin in the first place. ISBP Article 199 addresses to this issue and does not deem this to be a valid discrepancy.
We always promote the concept of “Right Data in the Right Document” in our workshops.
www.tolee.com
[edited 11/13/02 5:51:20 PM]
-
larryBacon
- Posts: 689
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:26 pm
clean on board b/l
whilst I agree that "on board" or "shipped on board" or "loaded on board" etc should have the same effect, when the word "clean" is used in this context it has a distinct meaning, indicating that that there are no clauses on the B/L relating to cargo received in a poor state, damaged, missing etc.
Laurence
Laurence
clean on board b/l
Laurence,
We think it is not necessary to mention "clean" in requiring a BL in a DC. For the same reason we need not ask for "compliant" documents in a DC. All these are default conditions anyway.
Use of such words are superfluous and maybe due to the party wishing to show off his or her knowledge about the UCP.
That is why the ISP 98 discourages use of terms like “absolute”, “callable”, “divisible”, fractionable”, indivisible”,”transmissible”, “assignable” etc. in a DC to “mud the waters”.
www.tolee.com
[edited 11/15/02 12:03:36 AM]
We think it is not necessary to mention "clean" in requiring a BL in a DC. For the same reason we need not ask for "compliant" documents in a DC. All these are default conditions anyway.
Use of such words are superfluous and maybe due to the party wishing to show off his or her knowledge about the UCP.
That is why the ISP 98 discourages use of terms like “absolute”, “callable”, “divisible”, fractionable”, indivisible”,”transmissible”, “assignable” etc. in a DC to “mud the waters”.
www.tolee.com
[edited 11/15/02 12:03:36 AM]
-
larryBacon
- Posts: 689
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:26 pm
clean on board b/l
T.O.
I agree with you that, in the absence of the word "clean" in relation to a B/L, banks should assume its presence unless contra-indicated. However, the question asked was whether "clean on board" was the same as "on board" etc and clearly it is not.
You have also assumed that the reference to "clean" was in relation to a B/L requirement in a DC. The original posting did not indicate whether or not this was the case.
Laurence
I agree with you that, in the absence of the word "clean" in relation to a B/L, banks should assume its presence unless contra-indicated. However, the question asked was whether "clean on board" was the same as "on board" etc and clearly it is not.
You have also assumed that the reference to "clean" was in relation to a B/L requirement in a DC. The original posting did not indicate whether or not this was the case.
Laurence
clean on board b/l
Laurence,
"On board" implies clean anyway according to trade practices and ISBP. The buyers expect and intend “clean on board” no matter what trade they are in.
Of course, literally they are different as the word clean is not there.
DOES THE WORD "CLEAN" REFER TO A BL IN THIS QUERY?
As far as ISBP or UCP are concerned, the word “clean” is mostly associated with the BL, although one may use it for other forms of transport documents such as the AWB.
For an undisputable answer, only the enquirer can provide. However, Laurence, we think we are on the right track. Why? Please take a good look at the title (and to be more precise, the "topic") of this enquiry - "clean on baord b/l".
www.tolee.com
[edited 11/16/02 3:20:24 PM]
"On board" implies clean anyway according to trade practices and ISBP. The buyers expect and intend “clean on board” no matter what trade they are in.
Of course, literally they are different as the word clean is not there.
DOES THE WORD "CLEAN" REFER TO A BL IN THIS QUERY?
As far as ISBP or UCP are concerned, the word “clean” is mostly associated with the BL, although one may use it for other forms of transport documents such as the AWB.
For an undisputable answer, only the enquirer can provide. However, Laurence, we think we are on the right track. Why? Please take a good look at the title (and to be more precise, the "topic") of this enquiry - "clean on baord b/l".
www.tolee.com
[edited 11/16/02 3:20:24 PM]
-
larryBacon
- Posts: 689
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:26 pm
clean on board b/l
T.O.
you have failed to find the clue I left previously.
The original question asked was about differences in meaning and outcome. I have already stated that there is a difference in meaning. If there were not, as suggested by you, there would be no difference between a claused "on board" B/L & a clean "on board" B/L or "clean on board" B/L.
Having established that there is a difference in meaning, what about outcome ? The first posting did not indicate whether this was in the context of UCP, URC or a general knowledge question. My posting of 15.11.2002 questioned whether the reference to "clean" related to a B/L in a DC. This affects the outcome. If it does relate to UCP, only an unclaused B/L will be acceptable (ceteris paribus). URC does not have this specific requirement. If neither URC nor UCP applies, acceptability depends on the contractual agreement.
Laurence
you have failed to find the clue I left previously.
The original question asked was about differences in meaning and outcome. I have already stated that there is a difference in meaning. If there were not, as suggested by you, there would be no difference between a claused "on board" B/L & a clean "on board" B/L or "clean on board" B/L.
Having established that there is a difference in meaning, what about outcome ? The first posting did not indicate whether this was in the context of UCP, URC or a general knowledge question. My posting of 15.11.2002 questioned whether the reference to "clean" related to a B/L in a DC. This affects the outcome. If it does relate to UCP, only an unclaused B/L will be acceptable (ceteris paribus). URC does not have this specific requirement. If neither URC nor UCP applies, acceptability depends on the contractual agreement.
Laurence