non-document condition

[loankim]

Dear all,
If an L/C stating in F47A that: " Shipment must be effected by Heung-A Shipping Co"
Does it mean that the carrier will be Heung-A Shipping Co ?, or
Is it a non-document condition?
Using a.m statement seems so doubts than "B/L has to be issued by Heung-A Shipping Co" if L/C wants the carrier will be Heung-A Shipping Co.
How about you ?

Rgds,

[picant]

Hi Pal,

IMHO field 47 a may contain additional requirement of documents listed in field 46 a, in the way that a bank will issue its own standard wording than arrange it on applicant request, by adding something in field 47 a. In your case if a sea transport document is requested(Multimodal, Marine Bill of lading, Seaway bill etc) it must be issued by the shipping co. indicated.

Other comments appreciated

Ciao

[shahriar]

in my opinion its a documentary condition. its not always necessary that we need to ask a certificate or document on every occasion. here the compliance of the condition can be easily examined by a bill of lading. in fact showing the name of the carrier is mandatory unless its a charter party BL.

ICC opinion 212

As pointed out in ICC Position Paper No.3, a condition is not deemed to be a non-documentary condition if the condition can be clearly linked to a document stipulated in the credit. Since the credit stipulated a Marine Bill of Lading, there was, in fact, a document called for to which the condition could be clearly linked.

you may be also interested DOCDEX Decision No. 205 which has the following case

LC shows

2) The L/C was acknowledged by Bank D on 10 November 1997 via SWIFT MT 799 with a request for clarification of the content of field 47a (Additional Conditions) which stated: "Shipment to be made on Mr A: 5-678 Attn.: Mr. X only".

3) Subsequently, on 12 November 1997, a SWIFT MT 799 was received by Bank D from Bank B stating: "Pls note additional conditions 47a clause you mentioned means the goods should be shipped by Mr A only."

the decision was

Analysis No. 3
The Additional Condition in the Letter of Credit required "Shipment to be made Mr A: 5-678 attn: Mr X only" without stating the document(s) to be presented in compliance therewith. Furthermore, in its clarification to the advising bank's inquiry, the issuing bank stated that the shipment should be made by the named carrier only, without stating further details.
The above circumstance indicated clearly that the only concern of the issuing bank was that the named carrier was to be used, while the telephone number and the attention person were to facilitate contacting of that carrier. We believe that to satisfy a requirement in an L/C does not necessarily mean that such a requirement should be copied word-by-word on the related documents. For instance, if a L/C requires that the goods be of German origin, the certificate of origin can attest that the goods are made in Germany. There is no need for the wording "The goods are of German origin" to appear on a document.
In this case, to indicate that the shipment has been effected through Mr A adequately satisfies the requirement of the L/C. Therefore, it is not necessary in the AWB to show the telephone number of the name of the attention party.

there were some other analysis here which did mention ICC position paper 3. hence certainly this is not a non documentary condition.

[loankim]

Hi my friends,

Thanks for yr comments so much !
May all happiness be with you the whole new year thru

Rgds,