XYZ AS AND XYZ LIMITED

QUESTION

Dear Nguyen,

Please find below the case for your kind opinion.

LC extract:

LC field 46A: Full set on board marine bill of lading consigned to Issuing Bank and Notify applicant and marked “Freight prepaid”

LC field 47A: Additional condition: Bill of lading should evidence that goods are shipped through/via XYZ Limited.

The Bill of lading is presented in XYZ stationary (not in XYZ limited) and it evidences the signatory field as follows:

XYZ Hong Kong P Ltd as agent for the

Carrier XYZ AS.

The issuing bank rejected the documents stating that Bill of lading does not evidence that goods are shipped through XYZ limited.

Please note even though the bill of lading evidences that it is being issued in XYZ stationery and its signatory field clearly states carrier as XYZ AS as well as agent as XYZ Hong Kong P Ltd. Hence nominated bank contested that it is not discrepancy.

Please comment your opine whether the presented bill of lading is complies with LC requirement.

Regards

Vijay

————

ANSWER

Dear Vijay,

There must be divided opinions. My opinion is that the issuing bank should not reject the documents based on such a discrepancy.

AS or A/S is a suffix indicating a joint stock company in some countries like Denmark, Norway, Czech…

The LC should have required that Bill of lading should evidence that goods are shipped through/via XYZAS instead of “… XYZ Limited”.

If the case is brought to trial and if in reality there exists only a shipping company named XYZ AS and not XYZ Limited, I do believe the decision of the court will be in favour of the nominated bank.

Kind regards,

Nguyen Huu Duc