Bill Of Lading Shows Place Of Taking In Charge

[gegeeee]

Guys,

For example under LC i requre a B/L. I received an B/L howevernamed and in it its written pl. of taking in charge as well port of Loading and Port of Discharge. Should i check it as per article 19 or shoud i refuse as i have not required Multimoadl B/L?

[picant]

Hi Pal,

art 19 or 20 depend on the field 44 in MT700 etc. If b/l has the box Place of receipt filled but not the pre-carriage you will not consider it, if filled you will apply the rule that the b/l must be contain the on Board notation at the Port of Lading, on the
Vessel indicated and be dated.
However it is better to see the b/l in full to answer to your question, if shipped or received for shipment , f.i.?
You may download the Document no 470/1128rev dd 22 april 2010 , free available at www.iccwbo.org as Recommrndation of the Banking Commission in respect of the requirement for an On board Notation.

Ciao

[gegeeee]

Picant,

Under LC i have such structure:

Port of Loading: Poti Port.
Port of Unloding: Marselle Port.

The transport document has showed: Pl of taking in charge: Xianjin street, Port of loading: Poti and Port of Unloding: Marselle. There is no indication of "intended Vessel" or "intended" ect.

So if transport document showed like this: PL. of Taking in charge: Poti and Port of Unloading: Marselle, Dated on board noatation with named Vessel and actual port of loading should be required. In my situation i am little confused as i dont understand should i raise a discrepancy? becasue bene presented multimodal transport document, however named, covering movement of goods utilizing at least two different modes of transport or should i check it as per article 19?

Alsi no pre-carriage is mentioned. Actually i want to find out if under LC i dont require multimodal but i receive doc that indicate pl. of taking in charge, port of loading and unloading and final place. shoud i raise a discrepancy or check as per art. 19?

[picant]

Hi Pal,

your l/c requires a port to port bill of lading, art 20.

if the b/l claused Shipped on board, it is ok.
If received for shipment need an on board notation, dated.

Naturally being the other terms complying with art 20:

Have you downloaded the ICC Documents?

Other comments appreciated

Ciao

[gegeeee]

Yes Picant i have just downloaded,

Picant that is why i am confused:
c. When a credit requires the presentation of a transport document other than a multimodal or combined
transport document, and it is clear from the routing of the goods stated in the credit that more than
one mode of transport is to be utilized, for example, when an inland place of receipt or final destination
are indicated, or the port of loading or discharge field is completed but with a place which is in fact an
inland place and not a port, UCP 600 article 19 is to be applied in the examination of that document.

I have just this case. Inland place is indicated in pl, in taking in chagre. I thought i had to raise disc.

[picant]

Hi pal,

please read the para. 5 conclusion.

Ciao

[gegeeee]

Thanks Picant.

It helped me a lot.