QUERY FROM GHUBSHAWI
Dear DC Experts,
I'm an applicant of L/C which was issued stating that the goods to be consinged to the issuing bank and our company as notify party.
Upon the receipt of the original shipping documents by issuing bank, the AWB found to order of the issuing bank, but not stating our company as notify party as per L/C terms , however the issuing bank refused to endorse the AWB to our company.
Is position of the issuing bank is correct?
Best regards,
Ghubshawi
—————————-
MR. OLD MAN'S COMMENT
AWB Issued to Order and Endorsement
Hi
That AWB is issued “to order” or “to order of a named party” is a bad habit that has been practiced over and over again.
ISBP Para. 143 says: “An airport transport document (AWB) should not be issued “to order” or ”to order of a named party”, because it is not a document of title”. I wish to add “and thus, it is not transferable by endorsement on the reverse”.
That the issuing bank refuses to endorse the AWB is quite correct. However, to enable the applicant to take the consignment, the issuing bank should issue a delivery authorization which would contain the following details:
+ Name of the entity duly authorized to take the consignment
+ AWB No./Flight No./Flight date/
+ Consigner
+ Name of Goods
+ Port of loading/port of discharge
+ Invoice No./Invoice value
+ L/C No.
+ The issuing bank’s instruction to the transport entity to release the consigment to the authorized entity.
Best regards,
Nguyen Huu Duc …
