Does “Clean On Board” Eliminate the Need for a Dated Onboard Notation?

A recurring question in documentary credit practice is whether the date of issue of a bill of lading may be treated as the shipment date when the document is pre-printed “Received for Shipment” but also bears the wording “Clean On Board”. The answer is not always straightforward and depends on the interaction between UCP 600, ISBP 821, and ICC Banking Commission recommendations regarding onboard notations. In the following case, Priya raises an interesting question as to whether the wording “Clean On Board” is sufficient, or whether a separate dated onboard notation is still required.

Question

Dear Mr. Old Man,

Greetings.

Could you please share your opinion on the following scenario regarding the requirement for an onboard date?

The letter of credit requires the presentation of a bill of lading (B/L). The presented B/L contains:

1. An issue date.
2. The pre-printed wording: “Received by the carrier …”
3. The wording “Clean On Board” appearing in the body of the B/L.

According to ISBP, for a pre-printed “Shipped on Board” bill of lading, the date of issue may be regarded as the date of shipment unless the B/L indicates another onboard date. ISBP also states that the wording “Clean on Board” has the same meaning as “Shipped on Board”.

In the above scenario, can the issue date be considered the onboard date?

In other words, for a pre-printed “Received by the carrier” bill of lading, is the mere presence of an onboard notation sufficient, or must it also be accompanied by a shipment date?

Article 20 of UCP 600 provides that the issue date of a bill of lading may be deemed to be the date of shipment. Does this rule also apply to a pre-printed “Received by the carrier” bill of lading when an onboard notation is present?

I have read several ICC opinions concerning the requirement for an onboard date. According to those opinions, a dated onboard notation is required for a pre-printed “received for shipment” bill of lading.

I would be greatly obliged if you could share your opinion on this matter.

Regards,

Priya

_____

Answer

Dear Priya,

Based on your description alone, it is not possible to give an entirely definitive answer because the bill of lading is pre-printed “Received for Shipment”. Under the ICC Banking Commission’s recommendations, a pre-printed “Received for Shipment” bill of lading would generally require a dated onboard notation.

However, my view is as follows.

ISBP 821 E7 provides that terms such as “Shipped in apparent good order”, “Laden on board”, “Clean on board”, or other phrases incorporating “shipped” or “on board” have the same effect as the words “Shipped on board”.

Accordingly, if the presented bill of lading contains the wording “Clean on Board”, that wording indicates that the goods have been shipped on board and, in my view, has the same effect as “Shipped on Board”. Therefore, the bill of lading may be regarded as a “Shipped on Board” bill of lading for the purpose of article 20 of UCP 600.

Under article 20(a)(ii) of UCP 600, where a bill of lading indicates that the goods have been shipped on board and there is no separate onboard notation indicating a shipment date, the date of issuance of the bill of lading is deemed to be the date of shipment.

Therefore, in the scenario described, since the bill of lading contains the wording “Clean on Board” but does not indicate a separate onboard date, my view is that the date of issuance may be deemed to be the date of shipment.

Note: This is my own interpretation of the interaction between article 20(a)(ii) of UCP 600 and paragraph E7 of ISBP 821.

Best regards,

Mr. Old Man