your opinion please....

cristiand969 · Post by **cristiand969** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:45 pm

Dear all.
Pls consider the following case: A letter of credit prohibiting partial shipments is available by payment against quote : presentation of following documents issued in one complete set:
1. Commercial Invoice
2. Full set 3/3 B/L
3. packing list
4. Quality certificate
unquote
The description of goods comprises of two items A and B
.
beneficiary has made a SINGLE presentation consisting of 2 separate sets of documents each for each item as above mentioned and this was due to nature of products because it said each Quality certificate must be issued for each item and also loading on board date was 01 and 02. april (not part shipment as is on the same vessel and same destination)
Now, what do you understand by wording : issued in one complete set. Is this presentation complying or not.
Thanks!

Navi · Post by **Navi** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:06 pm

Dear Cristiand,

By 2 separate sets, do you mean 2 different invoice, PL, BL, etc. or some docs in 2 sets others 1...?

Although the use of wording "issued in one ..." instead of "...presented in one " confuses me a bit, I nevertheless understand from the expression "in one complete set" that documents should be presented in one lot.

My opinion no discrepancy

Regards

shahriar · Post by **shahriar** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:48 pm

Hi Cris!

In my opinion complying. i agree with dear Navi. the credit ask for issued in one complete set; not asking for presentation in one set. besides, stand alone, "one complete set" is a term that should be disregarded. it does not communicate anything. by the way, does the credit requires a draft? how many of them was there?

cristiand969 · Post by **cristiand969** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:46 pm

Really appreciated your prompt answers and your excelent views as well.
Thanks a lot!
After all i think it is very likely an immaterial wording to trigger an advice of refusal.
Mr. Gary Collyer always said that we shouldn't stick to such immaterial discrepancies but for the ones really affecting the basis of transaction.

Have a nice day!
Cristian

jim · Post by **jim** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:20 pm

could you please tell me if the two bill of ladings was presented under two separate presentation, will it form a partial shipment?

cristiand969 · Post by **cristiand969** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:08 pm

Jim,
There is only one presentation of documents comprising of two separate sets each for each item.
No word abt part shipment as the 2 Bs/L show same vessel, same voyage and same destination

jim · Post by **jim** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:38 pm

dear Cristian,

actually i wanted to know whether presentation of two set of document considered to be a partial shipment where there are two bill of lading showing the goods are shipped on the same vessel for the same destination.

kinkidz · Post by **kinkidz** » Sat Apr 04, 2009 3:00 pm

complying

maqianyueer · Post by **maqianyueer** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:56 pm

NO PARTIAL SHIPMENT EFFECTED

shruti · Post by **shruti** » Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:05 pm

Dear Maqianyueer

article 31b of ucp supports your answer. it will not be a partial shipment

reagrds
kalra n k

fionawang · Post by **fionawang** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:43 am

Yes, according to Article 31, more than one set B/L but same conveyance, same journey, same destination, even different dates different ports of lading... would not be partial shipment. Just should notice the on board date should be Apr. 2nd.

SHAMEER · Post by **SHAMEER** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:44 pm

No partial shipment effected

Tks and rgds