It says
' A stand by is issued when it leaves an issuers control unless it clearly specifies that it is not then issued or enforceable. Statement that a stand by is not available , operative, effective, or the like do not affect its irrevocable and binding nature at the time it leaves issuer's control.
....... This section seems confusing to me. Would anyone plz clarify.
Regds
Zakir
Clarification Of ISP98 Rule 2.03
-
mzhossainctg2
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:18 pm
- First Name: Mohammad
- Last Name: Zakir
- Organization: ONE Bank Ltd
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
- Location: Bangladesh
-
thuyvan
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:42 pm
- First Name: thuy
- Last Name: van
- Organization: bank
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
- Location: vietnam
ISP 98 rule 2.03
Dear friends,
If a standby subject to ISP98 that states it is "not available", "not operative", "ineffective" or the like..., this means such standby is irrevocable and binding when issued. (the words ""not available", "not operative", "ineffective" or the like...have no meaning at all).
However, a standby subject to ISP98 that states it is "not issued" or "not enforceble" means such standby is not issued
not operative or effective) and therefore it is revocable and no binding even it leaves the issuer's control.
Regards,
Thuyvan
If a standby subject to ISP98 that states it is "not available", "not operative", "ineffective" or the like..., this means such standby is irrevocable and binding when issued. (the words ""not available", "not operative", "ineffective" or the like...have no meaning at all).
However, a standby subject to ISP98 that states it is "not issued" or "not enforceble" means such standby is not issued
not operative or effective) and therefore it is revocable and no binding even it leaves the issuer's control. Regards,
Thuyvan
-
dinesh2476
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:27 pm
- First Name: Dinesh Kumar
- Last Name: ...
- Organization: Chrome
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
- Location: PU
ISP 98 2.03
Dear Experts,
Have just gone through DC experts opinion in the forum that ICC also against such issuance from the LC issuing bank for which advising has all right to refuse such letter of credit and may seek explanation for inoperative if not clear in the LC.
However, above comments fom thuyvan suggest that we can disregard and proceed the above even if the LC states so. I wonder, won't the action put us adviser/confirmer in trouble?
Regards
Dinesh
Have just gone through DC experts opinion in the forum that ICC also against such issuance from the LC issuing bank for which advising has all right to refuse such letter of credit and may seek explanation for inoperative if not clear in the LC.
However, above comments fom thuyvan suggest that we can disregard and proceed the above even if the LC states so. I wonder, won't the action put us adviser/confirmer in trouble?
Regards
Dinesh
-
picant
- Posts: 2026
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:49 pm
Difficult to explain
Hi Pal,
the point refers to the time a bank has to book the risk on the applicant.
Clauses required to make the standby "effective" "operative" or "available"
may be "non documentary" and must be disregarded or "documentary" and
so the document will be presented at the time of availment.
So the nature of ISP is not to create an ambigous method of payment.
Other comments appreciated
Ciao
the point refers to the time a bank has to book the risk on the applicant.
Clauses required to make the standby "effective" "operative" or "available"
may be "non documentary" and must be disregarded or "documentary" and
so the document will be presented at the time of availment.
So the nature of ISP is not to create an ambigous method of payment.
Other comments appreciated
Ciao