act of god and not honoring a credit

[nura]

i know that UCP says that if a credit expires when the issuing bank is close for a act of god, the bank is not liable to honor it after it reopens. i dont like this clause and think that this is unjust to the beneficiary. why UCP has such a clause?

[SHAMEER]

Its not an injustice to the beneficiary, Its an fair clause in the interest of all the parties. If you look other way round, due to the act of god such as “GONNU” if beneficiary fails to ship the goods on the latest date of shipment, it deemed that he cannot not perform his obligation which is beyond his control, How can an issuing bank perform its obligation if the situation is not its control. Therefore, the force majeure clause is appropriate.

B regards

[iLC]

i am going to discuss whether the clause is justified or not. just want to say that ISP98 does allow presentation after a force majure.

3.14 Closure on a business day and authorization of another reasonable place for presentation

(a) If on the last business day for presentation the place for presentation stated in a standby is for any reason closed and presentation is not timely made because of the closure, then the last day for presentation is automatically extended to the day occurring thirty calendar days after the place for presentation re-opens for business, unless the standby otherwise provides.

however the scenario is bit different there.