ICC Digital Library Forum

In 'Received for Shipment' B/Ls, very ofter the "on baord" notation appears in space provided for "Particualrs furnished by shipper" and is not signed or initialled by the Carrier or their agents. Some B/Ls state "Particualrs declared by the shipper but not acknowledged by the Carrier" (or without responsibility of the Carrier or agent or similar wordings). Though, as per the erlier opinions, the "On Board" notation need not be signed, in situations as stated above, should it not be singed or initialled by the Carrrier/ Agent?

Secondly, again in the case of received for shipment B/Ls, where the date does not appear along with the "On Board" notation mentioned in the space for "particulars furnished by shipper", whether the date appering below the signature of the Carrier/ Agents should be deemed as the on board date ?

1. as long as a dated on board notation is evidenced on the face of the b/l and in all respects meet the requirements of ucp500, is ok.
2. if received for shipment b/l is presented a separate dated on board notation must be indicated on the face of the b/l.from your mssg i understand the date existing on the b/l is the issuing date of the b/l.isn't enough.

I guess there is a risk here that I do not fully understand the question – if that is so please bear with me.

Anyway – I expect that you refer to the situation where the on board notation is printed on the body of the B/L. i.e. in the large “free text field” in the middle – and not in a field specially designed to that purpose. Like this:

Quote
Particulars furnished by shipper – carrier not responsible
Description of goods:
CY/CY
1x40’ Container
Said to contain
1390 CS
Mozzarella cheese

Doc credit number: XXXZZZ

Shipped on board “MS vessel” voyage 01
From Copenhagen on 22 November 2006
Unquote

This example is taken from a Maersk B/L, and the “particulars furnished …” is sort of a heading – printed in bold.

I have never really thought about it like this. However I would not ask for a separate signature from the agent/carrier on this “on board notation”. It would be beyond my imagination that the “on board notation” was “furnished by the shipper” – and “without responsibility” added by the carrier – although it was not really onboard on that vessel. So I would only think that the “carrier not responsible” would only apply to the goods; number, description, quality etc. – and not the information directly related to the transport – like when and where the goods are shipped.

If I missed the point here – please let me know

Best regards
Kim

Ps. If the B/L is received for shipment – then you may refer to UCP 500 article 23(a)(ii) for the information to be contained in the on board notation:
Quote
In all other cases loading on board a named vessel must be evidenced by a notation on the bill of lading which gives the date on which the goods have been loaded on board, in which case the date of the on board notation will be deemed to be the date of shipment.
Unquote

[edited 11/22/2006 11:02:33 AM: ps added]