Charter Party B/L Showing Two Shipping Dates: Acceptable or Not?

In a recent discussion circle, LC specialists considered the situation of a bank receiving an MT710 to which the first advising bank added its confirmation. The commercial LC backed the sale of steel scrap. Field 44E of the LC specified any US port, Field 44F indicated Chattogram, Bangladesh, and the presented charter party bill of lading shows “Port of Loading: Long View and Long Beach USA” and “Port of Discharge: Chattogram, Bangladesh” on the same vessel and destined for the same destination. The LC allowed a Charter Party Bill of Lading and partial shipments were prohibited.

Before finalizing the charter party B/L, the beneficiary requested its bank, the second advising bank, to review the draft CPBL which showed two different places of issuance but within the same country, with two different dates of issuance and loaded on the same vessel, with different shipping dates: “Long View USA June 1, 2023 & Long Beach USA June 5, 2023”. The place and date of issuance of the Charter Party Bill of Lading were in agreement with ports of loading.

As the bank was asked to review the CPBL, LC specialists considered how they would advise their customer. One commenter suggested that the CPBL needed to be amended to show only one issuance date (the latter), but another specialist said this indication of place and date of issue is acceptable, adding that it is common in the steel industry for some goods to be picked up at one port and other goods at a second port.

The group considered whether a CPBL showing two issue dates violated UCP600 Article 22(a)(ii). A commenter urged the group to look at the situation from a practical point of view. The CPBL does not reflect a partial shipment as per ISBP 821 Paragraph G17(a) even though more than one set of original CPBL is not presented and there is no reason for the bank to refuse the CPBL: June 5 is considered the issuance date.