Best Trade Solution

Dear members
Will you consider documents discrepancy is the certificates shown greater quantity than the invoice? Your comments appreciated and if you can illustrate any article and publication

Hi Pal,

Some certificates, listed in ISBP 745 para Q, properly Q 6 b) may indicate a quantity that is greater than that stated ub the credit or any other stipulated document.
Other comments appreciated
Ciao

It is one of the main rules that the documents presented under LC should not conflict each other. Quantities, weights, prices, rates and descriptions should be in order with one an other.

HI Pals,

ISBP are quite clear!
Ciao

Hi
There are few documents stated in ISBP para Q6 which may indicate the qty greater than the invoice (stipulated docs)

Its very interesting if you see ISBP 745 point Q6 point b vs UCP Article 14 point d

"A certificate may indicate : a quantity that is greater than that stated in the credit or on any other stipulated document"

vs

UCP Article 14 point d

Data in a document, when read in context with the credit, the document itself and international standard banking practice, need not be identical to, but must not conflict with, data in that document, any other stipulated document or the credit.

it seems like a contradiction between UCP and ISBP and ISBP, but actually not. My point of view regarding this matter is, sometimes the quantity of goods surveyed by surveyor at port of loading is not only for one buyer.

For example :

Seller have two purchase orders of Coal from different buyer, and two LCs will be made.

Both of the LC showing same port of loading, and demand certificate from surveyor at loading port.

The Surveyor conduct analysis at loading port and does not make different report for each buyer, because the coal sent to buyer A and buyer B is from same place, in other words, coal for buyer A and buyer B is combined at loading port, before splited up in each mother vessel.

I think that's why in ISBP 745, there is exception for certificate to show different quantity than any other stipulated document.

So, no discrepancy at all

The UCP600 comes now to break up the doctrine of strict compliance as interpreted under the older versions by including
in article 2 , in definition of a complying presentation, a presentation that is in accordance with international standard banking and practice. Therefore the art 14 d is to be interpreted as amended or suplemented by the ISBP.
In this context, I personally consider that ISBP offers a broader explanation of how the wording 'but must not be in conflict to' is to be interpreted.
On the other hand one cannot have a double standard of checking docs, namely to recognize the applicability of paragraph L5 with regard to the name of consignee in the certificate of origin but not to recognize the aplicability of paragraph of Q6. However,by way of analogy with the reasoning applied to L8 (a different invoice may be stated on the cert of origin provided the exporter is not beneficiary) , the said certificate must not show that the entire quantity stated refers to qty invoiced to that buyer under that L/C or other similar references which clearly restrict the interpretation to the rest of documents presented (Ex: The certificate to indicate 4000 pcs as per B/L 1 and in B/L nr 1 to be indicated only 3000 pcs).
Regards, C

not a discrepancy. As per ISBP a certificate may indicate a greater quantity with that stipulated in other documents.
I agree with what MR. Fazar said. Refer UCP article 2, article 14 and ISBP Q6 for clear clarification.

A cert can show greater Qty provided the issuer is other than beneficiary as per ISBP