Home Uncategorized A CERTIFICATE MUST BE ISSUED BY THE ENTITY STATED IN THE CREDIT

A CERTIFICATE MUST BE ISSUED BY THE ENTITY STATED IN THE CREDIT

4 min read
6
0
2,305

QUESTION

Dear Mr. Old Man,

Please help me this case

L3 (c) (i) ISBP 745 states that when a credit requires the presentation of a certificate of origin issued by the beneficiary, the exporter or the manufacturer, this condition will also be satisfied by the presentation of a certificate of origin issued by a Chamber of Commerce or the like, such as, but not limited to, Chamber of Industry, Association of Industry, Economic Chamber, Customs Authorities and Department of Trade or the like, provided it indicates the beneficiary, the exporter or the manufacturer as the case may be.

How about Analysis, Inspection, Health, and other certificates (“certificate”)? When a credit requires the presentation of a certificate, e.g., certificate of inspection, issued by the beneficiary, the exporter or the manufacturer, is it a discrepancy if the certificate of inspection presented is issued by an independent/official entity other than the beneficiary/exporter/manufacturer?

Please refer me to articles of UCP or paragraph of ISBP that support your view.

Thank you very much.

AT
————

ANSWER

Hi,

Yes, it’s a discrepancy.

Paragraph L3 (c) (i) applies to certificate of origin only.

Regarding the issuer of Certificate of Analysis, Certificate of Inspection, Certificate of Health… paragraphs Q3, Q4 and Q5 states as follows:

Q3: A certificate is to be issued by the entity stated in the credit.
Q4: When a credit does not indicate the name of the issuer, any entity including the beneficiary may issue a certificate.
Q5: When a credit makes reference to an issue of a certificate in the context of its being “independent”, “official”, “qualified” or words of similar effect, a certificate may be issued by any entity except the beneficiary.

The provision in paragraph Q5 complies with Article 3 UCP 600, which says: “Terms such as “first class”, “well known”, “qualified”, “independent”, “official”, “competent” or “local” used to describe the issuer of a document allow any issuer except the beneficiary to issue that document”.

So, to conclude, when a credit requires presentation of a certificate of analysis, a certificate of inspection or a certificate of health issued by the beneficiary, the exporter or the manufacturer, such a certificate is to be issued by the entity stated in the credit, i.e., by the beneficiary, the exporter or the manufacturer as the case may be.

Best regards,
Mr. Old Man

Load More Related Articles
  • LẦN THỨ BA TRỞ LẠI NGÔI LÀNG ĐÃ MẤT

    Mr. Old Man gọi làng phong Hòa Vân (làng Vân) ở bãi biển dưới chân đèo Hải Vân là “ngôi là…
  • 100 KM DAI NHÁCH

    Hôm nay đạp xe đi Đông Giang với ý định đạp hết cung đường xã Tư quay trở ra chợ Trung Man…
  • NGÓ LÊN HÒN KẼM ĐÁ DỪNG

    Ngó lên Hòn Kẽm Đá Dừng Thương cha nhớ mẹ quá chứng bậu ơi Thương cha nhớ mẹ thì về Nhược …
Load More By Mr Old Man
Load More In Uncategorized

6 Comments

  1. Madhu

    August 2, 2016 at 12:37 pm

    Dear Sir,

    I have a quick question and my case details is as under :

    1. The LC says” CERTIFICATE OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS IN ONE ORIGINAL ISSUED BY CCIC SINGAPORE AT LOADING PORT”

    2. But, the certificates from surveyor mention ” ISSUED BY CCIC SINGAPORE PTE LTD AT LOADING PORT”

    Is there any discrepancy in this matter ? Can i defend that there is no discrepancy with reference to general practice or UCP rules ??

    Would appreciate your prompt reply.

    Thanks in Advance

    Madhu

    Reply

    • mroldman

      August 2, 2016 at 2:06 pm

      It is acceptable if the certificate is signed by CCIC Singapore Ltd. It’s better to indicate the actual port of loading. However, the cetification ” ISSUED BY CCIC SINGAPORE PTE LTD AT LOADING PORT”is ok.

      Reply

      • Madhu

        August 3, 2016 at 12:09 pm

        Thanks for your reply. The certificate is signed by CCIC SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

        Certificate also mentions ISSUED BY CCIC SINGAPORE PTE LTD AT LOADING PORT. Certificate also mentions Port of Loading clearly.

        But, the lC issuing bank is pointing it as a discrepancy. So, can you please guide with what UCP clauses i can use to fight against the LC issuing bank ??

        Thanks in advance.

        Regards
        Madhu

        Reply

        • mroldman

          August 3, 2016 at 3:27 pm

          Like the carrier’s name on the bill of lading, when the port of loading is identified elsewhere in the c/o, CCIC Singapore may sign the c/o stating “issued at the port of loading” without naming the port of loading again. There is no ICC opinion on this specific case, but I dare say 100% acceptable. No discrepancy!

          Reply

  2. Madhu

    August 3, 2016 at 8:27 pm

    Dear Sir,

    I think i have not clearly mentioned my query. Below are the details :

    1. LC mentions “CERTIFICATE OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS IN ONE ORIGINAL ISSUED BY CCIC SINGAPORE AT LOADING PORT”
    2. The certificates actually issued mentions ” ISSUED BY CCIC SINGAPORE PTE LTD AT LOADING PORT”
    3. The difference in point 1 and 2 is the word “PTE LTD”. The certificates actually issued mention CCIC SINGAPORE PTE LTD instead of CCIC SINGAPORE.
    4. So, LC issuing bank arguing that because certificate is issued by CCIC Singapore PTE LTD instead of CCIC singapore, documents are discrepant

    Bcos of words PTE LTD, they say there is discrepancy. There is no problem with loading port words etc.

    Kindly clarify, if the wording mentioned in certificates with PTE LTD is discrepancy.
    If no, please help with any UCP rules or cases on these.

    Thanks in advance
    Madhu

    Reply

    • mroldman

      August 4, 2016 at 9:46 am

      Addition of the words “Co Ltd” refers to the status of CCIC Singapore…The discrepancy is not valid.
      Refer to ICC Opinion TA778rev where BL indicates Notify party as HIJ, Survey Report indicates Buyer as HIJ Co., Ltd. ICC opined that the discrepancy is not valid as the addition of the words “Co Ltd” refers to the status of the buyer. Not conflicting!

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also

LẦN THỨ BA TRỞ LẠI NGÔI LÀNG ĐÃ MẤT

Mr. Old Man gọi làng phong Hòa Vân (làng Vân) ở bãi biển dưới chân đèo Hải Vân là “ngôi là…