Recently Decided Cases
DCW maintains a list of recently-decided court cases involving commercial letters of credit, standby LCs, demand guarantees, and other trade
DCW maintains a list of recently-decided court cases involving commercial letters of credit, standby LCs, demand guarantees, and other trade
This month, we sort through some of the big questions shaping LC practice today. Is it time to rewrite UCP
Following his writing in the past two editions of DCW, Robert Parson examines legal developments on sanctions and sanctions clauses that have arisen in courts recently and implications for LC practice.
Fraud prevention is a crucial pursuit, but is an interim/hybrid solution requiring a beneficiary’s bank to vouch for the beneficiary the answer? Or does it introduce added risks?
Fraud prevention is an ongoing goal. In the world of commercial LCs, standby LCs, and demand guarantees subject to either UCP 600, ISP98, or URDG758, banks/guarantors are not responsible for vetting or otherwise verifying any signatures on any of the drawing documents received. Additionally, the basic premise of the various rules is that banks are not responsible to vet any content or otherwise go beyond the four corners of any required document to determine whether any statement is true or false.
However, with the exception of UCP, these same rules indicate that when a non-paper or data demand is allowed, the bank receiving the data is expected to authenticate the sender of the data (data could be transmitted by a beneficiary, its forwarder, transportation carrier, chamber of commerce, etc.) in some manner, understanding that different systems/platforms employ different methods to ensure an authentication process. eUCP would be the applicable rules for data demands allowed by a commercial LC.
This month, we sort through some of the big questions shaping LC practice today. Is it time to rewrite UCP
Following his writing in the past two editions of DCW, Robert Parson examines legal developments on sanctions and sanctions clauses that have arisen in courts recently and implications for LC practice.
In the fifth instalment of his DCW article series on major contemporary issues surrounding documentary credit practice, ICC Banking Commission Senior Technical Advisor Dave Meynell offers his thoughts on the highly-charged question: Is it time for UCP to be revised?
Beyond questions on the rule of strict construction of LC terms, the In re Spiegel case should engender a discussion of the requirements of UCP vs. ISP on what certified means with respect to a government or court-issued document.
Gain full access to analysis, cases, eBooks and more with a DCW Free Trial