Home Uncategorized ADDITIONAL NOTIFY PARTY AND THE NAME OF THE COUNTRY IN TRANSPORT DOCUMENTS

ADDITIONAL NOTIFY PARTY AND THE NAME OF THE COUNTRY IN TRANSPORT DOCUMENTS

2 min read
6
0
3,264

560494_3589926747469_1842886371_n

Father and Daughter

QUESTION

Dear Mr. Old Man,

I read ISBP 745 and feel confused with some articles.  Please help me to clarify them:

  1. Paragraph D18 (a) say: “When a credit stipulates the details of one or more parties, a multimodal transport document may also indicate the details of one or more additional notify parties”.

What if  the credit stipulate only one notify party but the MMTD indicates two notify parties: one stated in the credit and an additional one not stated in the credit?

  1. Paragraph D9: Why need not the name of country be stated?

Thank you so much for your reply.

I appreciate your help.

Do Do

————————-

ANSWER

Hi,

  1. What I understand from paragraph D18 (a) is that a MMTD may indicate one or more notify parties in addition to the notify party required in the credit. There is no discrepancy.

This principle also applies to other transport documents including bill of lading, non-negotiable sea waybill, charter party bill of lading …

  1. ICC has many times explained in their official opinions that there is no requirement in the UCP or international standard banking practice for the country name to appear against a stated city shown as the place of receipt, port of loading, port of discharge or place of delivery. Absence of the country name is not a reason for refusal, notwithstanding that such words are stated in the credit.

The above opinion has been incorporated into ISBP 745.

Kind regards,

Mr. Old Man

Load More Related Articles
Load More By Mr Old Man
Load More In Uncategorized

6 Comments

  1. Do do bao thanh

    January 23, 2015 at 7:22 am

    Dear Mr Old Man,
    Please kindly help me to clarify whether it is discrepancy or not:
    1. the issuing bank refuses docs because B/L’s letterheading shows “Abc worldwide trading co., ltd”, but in its signature part, it shows “Abc trading co.,ltd as agent for the carrier Wan Hai lines ltd.”—–
    (The issuing bank means that there is the different name between letterheading and signature’name)

    2. If we receive the discr. from issuing bank and do not agree with that, how long can we debate with them? Is there the limited tim for this process? Or how long and how many times can we replace our docs?

    3. Agent ahipping cert.( certifying not transhipment through…) dated prior to shipment date, is it accepted?

    Thank you so much for your help. And have a nice weekend!

    Reply

    • mroldman

      January 24, 2015 at 8:01 pm

      1. Normally BL is not issued on the letterhead of the agent. It should be issued on the letterhead of the carrier, i.e., Wan Hai Lines Ltd.
      2. Please refer to the issuing bank’s statement of disposal of documents. You can replace documents many times provided that it is made within the stipulated presentation period and within the credit validity.
      3. Yes.

      Reply

      • do do bao thanh

        January 25, 2015 at 11:15 am

        Dear Mr Old Man,
        refer to case 1: this was the real case i saw recently. on the left corner of b/l header, it only show the name of wan hai lines ltd, but on the right coner of b/l header, it show full name and address of ABC Worldwide trading co ltd, and on the bottom of b/l, it shows ABC trading co ltd as agent for carrier wan hai lines ltd. the issuing bank refused due to the different of abc worldwide trading and abc trading. i can not find any condition of this matter on ucp.
        Thanh you so much for your help!

        Reply

    • mroldman

      January 25, 2015 at 3:28 pm

      If possible, let me see the bl.

      Reply

  2. Do do bao thanh

    February 8, 2015 at 10:55 pm

    Dear Mr Old Man,
    This is difficult to explain this case by words. May i have your email, i will send the file to you ( i can not see where to attchach files in this page). I also read many similar cases on some forums. Their B/Ls issued by a, but signed by b -as agent for the carrier c. And most of them agree that it is not discrepancy based on the sub-article 14L ucp 600. However, the others don’t agree because in their mind, that article is for forwarder. could you please help me to explain this article, who can issue the b/l (the issuer must be the signer or anyone can issue the b/l). Thank you so much and wish you an effective working week!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Check Also

INVOICE NOT CERTIFYING WHAT HAS NOT BEEN SHIPPED

QUESTION Dear Sir, LC allows both AIR and SEA shipment. Amount: USD 100,000 Shipment by AI…