Origin Station vs. Airport of Departure on an Air Waybill

A reader recently asked whether an air waybill would be discrepant if it uses the terms “Origin Station” and “Destination Station” instead of “Airport of Departure” and “Airport of Destination” required by the letter of credit. The reader also asked whether the presence of both a Master Air Waybill (MAWB) number and a House Air Waybill (HAWB) number, together with the heading “House Air Waybill,” would constitute a discrepancy.

Below is the question and my answer.

Question

Dear Sir,

How are you doing?

I have received a presentation under an L/C that states:

• Airport of Departure: “ANY AIRPORT IN CHINA”
• Airport of Destination: “ANY AIRPORT IN TUNISIA”

The credit requires:

“Air Waybill Original No. 3 for Shipper, consigned to ABC Bank, indicating the actual flight number and actual flight date, showing freight payable at destination and notify party.”

However, the presented AWB shows “Origin Station” instead of “Airport of Departure” and “Destination Station” instead of “Airport of Destination.” Would this constitute a discrepancy?

In addition, the AWB shows both the Master Air Waybill (MAWB) number and the House Air Waybill (HAWB) number, while the heading of the document reads “House Air Waybill.” Would this also be considered a discrepancy?

Could you also provide the relevant UCP 600 or ISBP provisions supporting your conclusion? I have been unable to locate any specific clause dealing with these issues.

Regards,

C.R. Nishanth

_______

Answer

Dear Nishanth,

Thank you for your question.

Under article 23(a)(iv) of UCP 600, an air transport document, however named, must appear to indicate the airport of departure and the airport of destination stated in the credit.

In your case, the credit requires shipment from “ANY AIRPORT IN CHINA” to “ANY AIRPORT IN TUNISIA.” If the presented air waybill merely indicates “Origin Station” and “Destination Station” without clearly identifying the required airports, the document would be discrepant under article 23(a)(iv).

However, if the “Origin Station” and “Destination Station” boxes contain the names of the airports required by the credit, the document would comply with this requirement. A discrepancy would arise only if the required airports cannot be identified from the air waybill.

Regarding the second issue, the mere fact that the document shows both the MAWB number and the HAWB number, or that its heading reads “House Air Waybill,” does not, by itself, render the document discrepant, provided that it is signed in accordance with article 23(a)(i) of UCP 600 and otherwise complies with the terms and conditions of the credit.

It should be noted that the headings “Origin Station” and “Destination Station” are more commonly found in House Air Waybills or other non-IATA air transport documents than in standard airline Master Air Waybills. However, the headings themselves are not decisive; what matters is whether the document, however named, appears to indicate the airport of departure and the airport of destination required by the credit.

Finally, please note the expression “however named” in article 23. This means that the title or format of the document is not decisive. What matters is whether the document, regardless of its name, satisfies the requirements of UCP 600 article 23.

Best regards,

Mr. Old Man