BL AND BL RIDER SIGNED WITH DIFFERENT SIGNATURES

18 Comments

1. 

   Muzammil Hayath

   August 22, 2017 at 6:22 pm

   Dear Mr Oldman,

   with reference to below Answer (Which is Vietnamese) is frequently required to almost to everyone..please we need this answer in English..

   Thanking you in advance.

   Hi,

   Nếu nhìn thấy BL và Certificate, câu trả lời sẽ chắc chắn hơn.

   Theo mô tả, tôi hiểu ý bạn muốn nói đến BL có thêm trang phụ lục kèm theo BL (attached bill of lading rider page).

   Theo paragraph A36 (b) ISBP 745, khi chữ ký thể hiện rằng nó ký thay (hoặc thay mặt cho) một chi nhánh của người phát hành thì chữ ký đó được xem là chữ ký của người phát hành.
   Trang phụ lục của BL được ký bởi HANJIN SHIPPING (VIETNAM CO) – một chi nhánh của nhà chuyên chở HANJIN SHIPPING CO – được xem là chữ ký của nhà chuyên chở HANJIN SHIPPING CO. Mr. Old Man cho rằng BL và trang phụ lục được ký như mô tả là hợp lệ. Có thể chấp nhận BL và trang phụ lục được ký bởi cùng một nhà chuyên chở HANJIN SHIPPING CO ngay cả chữ ký trên các BL khác với chữ ký trên trang phụ lục BL.

   Nhân đây cũng lưu ý thêm rằng theo paragraph E24 ISBP 745 thì xác thực sửa đổi trên BL phải được thực hiện bởi nhà chuyên chở, thuyền trưởng hoặc một đại lý bất kỳ mà đại lý đó CÓ THỂ KHÁC VỚI ĐẠI LÝ PHÁT HÀNH BL, miễn là đại lý đó được nhận biết là đại lý của nhà chuyên chở hay thuyền trưởng. Với logic này cũng có thể suy ra rằng BL và trang phụ lục BL được ký như mô tả là hợp lệ.

   Kind regards,
   Mr. Old Man

   P/s: Mr. Old Man nhớ lại tình huống sau:
   – LC yêu cầu xuất trình “Signed commercial invoice in 02 originals”
   – 02 invoice gốc được người thụ hưởng (ví dụ, ABC Co., Ltd) xuất trình nhưng chữ ký trên hai invoice đó khác nhau.

   Câu trả lời rằng hai invoice được ký bởi hai cá nhân khác nhau thay mặt cho người thụ hưởng không làm cho các invoice đó bất hợp lệ.

   Reply

• 

  mroldman

  August 22, 2017 at 9:16 pm

  Try to read those in English. I do not have much time to translate, especially long answers.

  Reply

• 

  mroldman

  August 23, 2017 at 9:47 am

  Hi,

  Here’s the translation:

  I could give a definite answer if I saw the bill of lading and the certificate.

  According to your description, I understand you are referring to the attached bill of lading rider page.
  According to ISBP 745 A36 (b), when a signatory indicates it is signing for [or on behalf of] a branch of the issuer, the signature will be considered to be that of the issuer.
  HANJIN SHIPPING (VIETNAM CO), a branch of HANJIN SHIPPING CO, signs the attached bill of lading rider page, so its signatory is deemed to be that of HANJIN SHIPPING CO. In my opinion, the fact the the bill of lading and the attached rider page are signed in the described manner is acceptable. It is also acceptable if the the bill of lading and the attached rider page are signed by the same carrier with different signatures
  By the way, it is further noted that Any correction of data on a bill of lading is to be authenticated. authentication of any correction of data on a bill of lading is to appear to have been made by the carrier, master (captain) or any one of their named agents, who may be DIFFERENT WITH THE AGENT THAT MAY HAVE ISSUED BILL OF LADING, provided they are identified as an agent of the carrier or the master (captain). In view of this logic, it is acceptable if the the bill of lading and the attached rider page are signed in the described manner.
  Kind regards,

  Mr. Old Man

  P/s: I do not have much time to translate into English. So, please read those in English. Thank you!

  Reply

• 

  Muzammil Hayath

  August 23, 2017 at 11:53 am

  Dear Mr Old Man…Thank you very much …The above answer is more enough to understand..as well as much helpful for me to make complying presentation…once again thank you very much ….

  Reply

2. 

   Danushka

   August 27, 2017 at 6:54 pm

   Dear Mr. Oldman,

   As per article 14 (g), document not required by the credit is to be disregarded.
   What if presentation consists of documents not required by the credit and data in
   that document (s) conflict with the credit or any other document, still we need to disregard it or are we in a position to raise discrepancies?

   BR

   Danushka Sumathiratne

   Reply

• 

  mroldman

  August 28, 2017 at 6:15 am

  Disregard it!

  Reply

• 

  Danushka

  August 30, 2017 at 11:12 pm

  Thk u Mr. OldMan

  Reply

• 

  MUZAMMIL CDCS

  August 28, 2017 at 11:26 am

  Presentation of a document which is not required in the DC will be disregarded and content of data will also be ignore…

  Reply

• 

  Danushka

  August 30, 2017 at 11:13 pm

  Thk U Mr. Muzammil

  Reply

3. 

   MUZAMMIL CDCS

   August 29, 2017 at 10:04 am

   Dear Mr. Old man , Good Day ..How are you Mr Oldman…how is your recovery stage now …please help me regarding below questions….Without your help we could not able to understand the UCP articles and ISBP Para.Mr oldman need your help on this..please whenever you are free…please post your valuable answer…article 38 says …The transferred credit must accurately reflect the terms and conditions of the credit, including
   confirmation, if any, with the exception of:
   – the amount of the credit,
   – any unit price stated therein,
   – the expiry date,
   – the period for presentation, or
   – the latest shipment date or given period for shipment,
   any or all of which may be reduced or curtailed. MY QUESTION is 1) can we increase the unit price while issuing transferable LC to second beneficiary….if No 2)can we hide the unit price while issuing transferable LC to second beneficiary … Mr old man need your valauable suggestion …

   Reply

• 

  mroldman

  August 29, 2017 at 10:27 am

  1) No.
  2) I think it’s possible due to no affect. Yet, it needs the agreement of the transferring bank.

  Reply

• 

  MUZAMMIL CDCS

  August 29, 2017 at 10:31 am

  Thank you Mr old man

  Reply

4. 

   Danushka

   August 31, 2017 at 6:52 pm

   DEAR MR. OLD MAN,

   WE HAVE ISSUED A LC WITH THE FOLLOWING CLAUSE (46 A)
   (2) FULL SET OF CLEAN ON BOARD MARINE BILLS OF LADING
   MADE OUT TO THE ORDER OR ENDORSED TO THE ORDER OF BANK
   X ‘FREIGHT PREPAID’ NOTIFY: APPLICANT.

   BL PRSENTED STATE CONSIGNEE AS “TO ORDER” AND SHIPPER HAS JUST SIGN IN THE REVERSE OF THE BL (BLANK ENDORSED).
   WE HAVE RAISE THE DISCREPANCY “B/L NOT MADE OUT OR ENDORSED TO THE ORDER OF BANK X”.
   THEY HAVE CHALLENGE OUR DISCREPANCY STATING THE FOLLOWING,
   “AS PER ITEM 2 IN FILED 46A OF LC REQUIRED ‘FULL SET……… AS INDICATED, THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS IN THIS CASE. 1/FULL SET B/L ENDORSED TO THE ORDER, 2/FULL SET B/L ENORSED TO THE ORDER OF BANK X.
   THE PRESENTED B/L HAS BEEN ALREADY CONSISTENET WITH THE 1ST OPTION I.E. MADE OUT TO THE ORDER AN BLANK ENDORSED BY THE SHIPPER. THEFORE, THE DOCS IS COMPLIED WITH LC TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
   FURTHER THEY STATED THAT,
   THE WORD ‘OR’ USED IN THE ABOVE REQUIRMENT MEANS THAT WE CAN CHOOSE ONLY 1 IN 2 OPTIONS. AS PER ISBP E13 SUBARTICLE a, WHEN CONSIGNEE ON BL IS ‘TO THE ORDER’, IT CAN BE BLANK ENDORSED BY THE SHIPPER. THERFORE, OUR PRESENTED B/L IS COMPLIANT AND ISBP E15 NOT APPLIED IN THIS SITUATION.
   HOWEVER, AS THE ISSUING BANK OUR INTENTION WAS B/L EITHER TO BE MADE OUT TO THE ORDER OF BANK “X” OR ENDORSE TO THE ORDER OF BANK “X”.
   IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT BL ATTACHED WITH THEIR SECOND PRESENTATION (PARTIAL SHIPMENT ALLOWED) MENTIONED THE CONSIGNEE AS “TO ORDER” AND SHIPPER HAS ENDORSED THE B/L TO THE BANK X IN THE REVERSE OF THE B/L.

   WHICH BANK IS RIGHT IN THIS CASE.

   Reply

• 

  mroldman

  August 31, 2017 at 9:30 pm

  It is commonly agreed that the issuing bank’s intention is b/l made out to the order of issuing bank or endorsed to the order of issuing bank.
  L/C also clearly states “… made out to THE order…”, and not “… made out to order”. Therefore, the b/l should made out “to the order of issuing bank” instead of “to order blank endorsed”

  Reply

• 

  Danushka

  August 31, 2017 at 11:08 pm

  Thk u for the Answer. Now I have the confidence to defend.

  Reply

5. 

   hayath

   September 9, 2017 at 12:44 am

   Dear Mr Oldman … I m a big fan of you…please help me regarding below issue….issuing bank is Vietnam….OBL states vessel name and voyage column APL O63E whereas shipped on board notation states APL O63 omits the E
   LC having any type errors does not affect quantity, quality are acceptable.
   Please confirm Obl is Ok for compliant presentation..please share any ICC Opinion so that I can discuss with bank if they quote discrepancy …

   Reply

• 

  mroldman

  September 11, 2017 at 4:01 pm

  Hi,

  APL 063E is the voyage number. As far as I know, the letter “E” in the voyage number indicates the voyage direction, i.e., East = Europe to Asia.

  The fact that the shipped on board indicates APL 063 without E is just a typing error. No discrepancy in my opinion.

  Sorry I find no ICC opinion with regard to this specific case.

  Kind regards,
  Mr. Old Man

  Reply

• 

  Hayath

  September 11, 2017 at 5:12 pm

  Thank You Mr Oldman, it is ok for me to negotiate with bank confidently…

  Reply