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.
The LC concept of negotiation has led to considerable misunderstanding and confusion in practice. In his article, Abdurrahman Özalp attempts to wade through areas of uncertainty and cast light on difficulties that confirming banks and beneficiaries could encounter.
When issuing banks insert complex reimbursement terms and self-serving conditions into their credits, it distorts the purpose of the product, causes problems for confirming banks, and drives exporters away from using LCs.
ICC TAB 9 points out that there is a risk of documents being presented to more than one bank at the same time, especially under an LC that is freely negotiable, but it stops short of making any recommendations for avoiding this risk. Here’s my suggestion.
💡Kuvera Resources Pte Ltd. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. [2023] [2023] SGCA 28 [Singapore] Type of Lawsuit: Beneficiary appealed
The BNP v. Natixis case involved the assignment of letter of credit (LC) proceeds and nomination under an LC, raising legal considerations. The court ruled in favor of the assignee (BNP), stating that Natixis waived any right to setoff when accepting the assignment. A Chinese law view
The article “My Take on the Need for ICC Interpretation of UCP 600 Article 35” by Pavel Andrle (Oct 2020
Gain full access to analysis, cases, eBooks and more with a DCW Free Trial
