DCW Monthly: February 2025
This month, we're spotlighting the challenges and hard-earned lessons emerging from LC disputes and sanctions enforcement crackdowns. Carter
A DCW reader asked about the impact of a specific clause in a counter guarantee issued by a US bank under ISP98 and Saudi law. This clause raises concerns about the presentation of documents and potential payment restrictions
From June 2013's DCW
A DCW Reader Writes:
May I have your opinion on the following query:
A Counter Guarantor Bank issued its Counter Guarantee in favor of a Guarantor (Bank). The Counter Guarantee is subject to ISP98, whereas the Guarantee that will be issued by the Guarantor is subject to Saudi Law.
Guarantee is payable against presentation of a simple demand.
The Counter Guarantor (domiciled in USA) incorporated the following paragraph in their Counter Guarantee indemnity:
a) What is the impact of this paragraph on the document (simple demand)?
b) Is there any requirement of a document/certificate that should be presented by the Guarantor to the Counter Guarantor in the event that there is a call for payment?
I am aware of the ICC Guidance Paper on the Use of Sanction Clauses for Trade Related but am unsure if it is useful in this situation.
DCW Responds:
Gain full access to analysis, cases, eBooks and more with a DCW Free Trial