Best Trade Solution

Dear Forumer,

Pls share your opinion on the following case.
LC required “Marine B/L made out to the order of issuing bank and marked freight prepaid”.
F44E: any port in USA
F44F: Busan port, S.Korea

Docs presented as follows:
B/L shows:
Port of discharge: Incheon
Place of delivery: Busan port
No notation be indicated.

The discrepancy “B/L showing port of discharge not as LC
requirement”. Is it valid?
Thks for posting.

Hi Pal,

if the discrepancy refers to the missing name of Country S. Korea, the bank who send the message
is wrong. There is an specific opinion, but all is in ISBP 745 para. E9:
"A bill of lading is to indicate the port of discharge stated in the credit.When a credit indicates the port of discharge by also stating the country in which the port is located, the name of the country need not be stated"

Contact this bank and inform about novelties(2013)
Ciao

The port of discharge is not the one required by the credit!

Hi Pal,

so it is applicable ISBP 745 para E 8:
Ciao

in this case I guess not.. this is because the discharge port is declared as Incheon and on the other hand there is no indication as provided under E8, namely the port of discharge is that stated under heading "place of final destination".

Is it any other notation on the body of Bill of Lading evidencing that the port of discharge is stated under place of final destination, or for example, "port of discharge Busan port,S. korea?"

if there is any evidence, then the BL is comply with LC terms, if there is not any evidence, it is discrepant

The problem is that L/C requires Port of discharge (F.44F): Busan but docs presented with Port of discharge as INCHEON at the printed field.

This B/L should have a notation on it.