Uncategorized DOCUMENTS LOST IN TRANSIT By Mr Old Man Posted on December 12, 2012 10 min read 18 0 4,368 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on Reddit Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr QUESTION Chào anh, Em hiện đang là sinh viên ngành tài chính ngân hàng, và hiện giờ đang phải làm assignment về L/C. Em có hơi băn khoăn về case mà mình nhận được nên viết mail này để thọ giáo anh. Anh có thể cho em gợi ý bài nyaf được không ạ? Nếu được thì em cảm ơn anh. The documents presented under a baby letter of credit subject to UCP 600 were lost during transit. Nevertheless, Bank IB, the intermediate bank that issued the baby credit, paid the ultimate supplier according to the provisions of UCP 600 article 35. Certified true copies of documents, including the bills of lading, other than drafts and commercial invoices that were replaced with originals, were presented to Bank IA, the issuing bank of the master letter of credit that was also subject to UCP 600. Could Bank IA refuse the otherwise compliant presentation according to UCP 600 17 (a), relying on the following reasons: The two credits, although both subject to UCP 600, are in fact separate payment undertakings. The originals are lost in another presentation (under the baby credit) and not in the same presentation (under the master credit), and Most of the documents (other than drafts and commercial invoices) are not originals? ————– ANSWER Dear Thúy Anh, Trong giao dịch back to back, Master L/C và Baby L/C là hai L/C riêng lẻ, và cam kết thanh toán của hai L/C đọc lập với nhau. Do vậy, việc chứng từ xuất trình theo L/C này bị thất lạc không ảnh hưởng đến cam kết thanh toán của L/C kia. Theo Điều 35 UCP 600 nếu ngân hàng được chỉ định xác định chứng từ phù hợp và gửi đến ngân hàng phát hành để đòi tiền thì ngân hàng phát hành phải thanh toán ngay cả khi chứng từ bị thất lạc trên đường đi (If a nominated bank determines that a presentation is complying and forwards the documents to the issuing bank or confirming bank, whether or not the nominated bank has honoured or negotiated, an issuing bank or confirming bank must honour or negotiate, or reimburse that nominated bank, even when the documents have been lost in transit between the nominated bank and the issuing bank or confirming bank, or between the confirming bank and the issuing bank). Bạn tham khảo thêm Q&A đính kèm dưới đây nhé. Best regards,Mr. Old Man—————–DOCUMENTS LOST IN TRANSITThư mục: Tổng hợp | Đăng ngày: 17:36 25-08-2008 Post subject: documents lost in transit UCP600 Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:36 pm Hi! UCP600 says Article 35 Disclaimer on Transmission and Translation A bank assumes no liability or responsibility for the consequences arising out of delay, loss in transit, mutilation or other errors arising in the transmission of any messages or delivery of letters or documents, when such messages, letters or documents when such messages, letter or documents are transmitted or sent according to the requirements stated in the credit, or when the bank may have taken the initiative in the choice of the delivery place in the absence of such instruction in the credit. If nominated bank determines that a presentation in complying and forward the documents to the issuing bank or confirming bank, whether or not the nominated bank has honored or negotiated, an issuing bank or confirming bank must honor or negotiate, or reimburse that nominated bank, even when the documents have been lost in transit between the nominated bank and the issuing bank or confirming bank, or between the confirming bank and the issuing bank. A bank assumes no liability or responsibility for error in translation or interpretation of technical terms and may transmit credit terms without translating them. now lets say that the documents were destroyed for any reason when it was in the possession of the nominated bank but was already determined as a complying presentation, can the nominated bank claim under that letter of credit? jim——————————————————-Post subject: Re: documents lost in transit UCP600 Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:29 pm Dear Jim, Under UCP 600 Article 35, the nominated bank is entitled to the issuing bank’s reimbursement even when the documents have been lost in transit between the nominated bank and the issuing bank. Yet, I think the nominated bank, if required, must provide the issuing bank with proofs evidencing that the documents lost in transit are complying and that the nominated bank has forwarded the complying documents to the issuing bank. In this case, the issuing bank may require the nominated bank to provide it with a set of photocopied documents lost in transit and its courier receipt. In my opinion if the documents, whether complying, were destroyed due to the nominated bank’s negligent fault and/or not forwarded to the issuing bank, the nominated bank is not entitled to any reimbursement from the issuing bank. The phrase "destroyed in transit" is not covered in UCP 600 Article 35. Yet, I think, similar to the case where the documents have been lost in transit, the issuing bank must honour or reimburse the nominated bank even when the documents have been destroyed in transit. Of course, the issuing bank has the right to request the nominated bank to give proofs to evidence that the original documents destroyed in transit are complying by asking for a set of photocopied documents (and its courier receipt if necessary). Best regards,Nguyen Huu Duc
IS THE NOMINATED BANK REQUIRED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE BENEFICIARY HAS AUTHORIZED THE PRESENTING BANK TO PRESENT THE DOCUMENTS?
CAN THE ISUING BANK CITE “LATE PRESENTATION” AS A DISCREPANCY SOLELY BASED ON THE DATE OF THE COVER LETTER?
IS THE NOMINATED BANK REQUIRED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE BENEFICIARY HAS AUTHORIZED THE PRESENTING BANK TO PRESENT THE DOCUMENTS?
CAN THE ISUING BANK CITE “LATE PRESENTATION” AS A DISCREPANCY SOLELY BASED ON THE DATE OF THE COVER LETTER?