Article 24 (a)(i) – Signature or Receipt of Goods: One, the Other, or Both?

Intro:

At first glance, UCP 600 article 24 (a)(i) seems straightforward. Yet the small word “or” often raises a practical question: must a transport document be both signed and indicate receipt of goods—or is one enough? The answer lies in reading the structure carefully, and in understanding how ISBP 821 complements (but does not change) the rule.

Question

Hi Sir,

I need your guidance once again.

Article 24 (a)(i) states that a road, rail or inland waterway transport document, however named, must appear to indicate the name of the carrier and:

• be signed by the carrier or a named agent for or on behalf of the carrier, OR
  • indicate receipt of the goods by signature, stamp or notation by the carrier or a named agent for or on behalf of the carrier

Does it mean that when the carrier or its named agent signs the document, there is no need for the document to indicate receipt of the goods, or must it indicate both?

Best regards,

Ahtisham

_______

Answer

Dear Ahtisham,

Yes—under UCP 600 article 24 (a)(i), the document may comply by indicating (A) or (B), or both:

• (A): signed by the carrier or its named agent (properly identified), or
  • (B): indicating receipt of the goods by a signature, stamp or notation by the carrier or its named agent

Accordingly, a document that satisfies either (A) or (B) is compliant; having both is common but not required.

As to why ISBP 821 paragraphs J2 and J3 still refer to both (A) and (B): they do not introduce any additional requirement. Rather, they clarify that, whether the document is signed or indicates receipt of goods, the act must be clearly attributable to the carrier or its named agent and properly identified.

Best regards,

Mr. Old Man