Compliance Standards in the Law of Documentary Letters of Credit

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 shahid beheshti university

2 LLM in law, shahid beheshti university

Abstract

Documentary letter of credit is an important mechanism for payment and finance in international trade with a variety of functions. However, by applying this method, international traders and banks encounter several problems of which one of the most important is compliance of documents with terms and conditions provided in the letter of credit. As stated in introduction of Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, more than 70 percent of presentations are rejected by banks at the first time, which can cause significant financial losses, waste of time and vain litigations. As, in documentary credit operation, the realisation of the credit is subject to compliant presentation, clarifying the rule governing documentary compliance has significant importance for desirable performance of letters of credit and ability to predict an identical result through a uniform approach for all parties involved. By assessing common compliance standards, this article is an attempt to achieve the appropriate criterion for determining compliance or discrepancy of tendered documents. As a result, it can be said that the most effective standard to identify the conformity of documents is strict compliance doctrine; Nevertheless, it is important to note that strict compliance test does not necessarily require literal, mirror image approach to the determination of documentary compliance, but trivial and obvious discrepancies that create no risk for parties involved does not render the presented documents non-compliant.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

فهرست منابع
Books
1. Adodo, Ebenezer. Letters of Credit: The Law and Practice of Compliance. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
2. Bridge, Michael G, ed. Benjamin's Sale of Goods. 9th edn. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2014.
3. Ellinger, Peter and Dora Neo. The Law and Practice of Documentary Letters of Credit. London: Hart Publishing, 2010.
Articles
4. Adodo, Ebenezer. “Conformity of Presentation Documents and a Rejection Notice in Letters of Credit Litigation: A Tale of Two Doctrines”. Hong Kong Law Journal, 36 (2006): 309-340.
5. Alavi, Hamed. “Documentary Letters of Credit, Principle of Strict Compliance and Risk of Documentary Discrepancy”. Korea University Law Review, 19:3 (2016): 3-21.
6. Al-tawil, Tareq. “Letters of Credit and Contract of Sale: Autonomy and Fraud”. International Trade and Business Law Review, 16 (2013): 159-224.
7. Beck, Anthony. “The Doctrine of Substantial Performance: Conditions and Conditions Precedent”. The Modern Law Review, 38 (1975): 413-428.
8. Dolan, John F. “A Principled Exception to the Strict Compliance Rule in Trilateral Letter of Credit Transactions”. Banking & Finance Law Review, 18 (2003): 245.
9. Dolan, John F. “Letter-of-Credit Disputes between the Issuer and Its Customer: The Issuer’s Rights under the Misnamed ‘Bifurcated Standard’”. Banking Law Journal, 105 (1989): 380-415.
10. Dolan, John F. “Strict Compliance with Letters of Credit: Striking a Fair Balance”. Banking Law Journal, 102 (1985): 18-32.
11. Ellinger, Peter. “New Problems of Strict Compliance in Letters of Credit”. Journal of Business Law, 1988: 320-322.
12. Hotchkiss, Carolyn. “Strict Compliance in Letter-of-Credit Law: How Uniform is the Uniform Commercial Code?”. Uniform Commercial Code Law Journal, 23 (1991): 288-301.
13. HwaidiHP, Mohd. “The Story of the English Strict Compliance Principle in Letters of Credit and its Consistency with the UCP”. Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation, 29(2) (2014): 71-81.
14. Kozolchyk, Boris. “Strict Compliance and the Reasonable Document Checker”. Brooklyn Law Review, 56:45 (1990): 45-80.
15. Mehler, Irving M. “Substantial Performance versus Freedom of Contract”. Brooklyn Law Review, 33 (1967): 196-218.
16. Rattner, Steven C. “Letters of Credit: a Return to the Historical Documentary Compliance Standard”. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 46:457 (1985): 457-485.
17. Roane, Kyle. “Hanil Bank v. PT Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero): Continuing the Quandary of Documentary Compliance under International Letters of Credit,” Houston Law Review, 41:3 (2004): 1053-1089.
Legal Sources
18. International Chamber of Commerce. Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, 2007 Revision. Paris: ICC Publication No. 600, 2007.
19. International Chamber of Commerce. International Standard Banking Practice for the examination of documents under documentary Credits, 2007 Revision for UCP 600, 2007 edn. Paris: ICC Publication No. 681, 2007.
20. International Chamber of Commerce. International Standard Banking Practice for the examination of documents under UCP 600, 2013 edn. Paris: ICC Publication No. 745, 2013.
21. International Chamber of Commerce. ICC Banking Commission Collected Opinions 1995-2001. Paris: ICC Publication No. 632, 2002.
22. International Chamber of Commerce. ICC Banking Commission Collected Opinions 2009-2011. Paris: ICC Publication No. 732, 2012.
23. International Chamber of Commerce. Collected Docdex Decisions 1997-2003. Paris: ICC Publication No. 665, 2004.
24. International Chamber of Commerce. Collected Docdex Decisions 2009-2012. Paris: ICC Publication No. 739, 2012.
Cases
25. Astro Exito Navegacion S.A. v. Chase Manhattan Bank N.A. (The Messiniaki Tolmi) [1988] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 217.
26. Bulgrains & Co Ltd v Shinhan Bank [2013] EWHC 2498 (QB).
Crédit Industriel et Commercial v China Merchants Bank [2002] EWHC 973 (Comm).
27. English, Scottish & Australian Bank Ltd v Bank of South Africa [1922]13 Lloyd's Rep. 21.
28. Equitable Trust Co of New York v Dawson Partners Ltd [1927] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 49.
29. Glencore International AG & Anor v Bank of China [1996] C.L.C. 95.
30. JH Rayner & Co Ltd v Hambro's Bank Ltd [1943] 1 K.B. 37. 
31. Kredietbank Antwerp v Midland Bank Plc [1999] C.L.C. 1108.
32. Lamborn v Lake Shore Banking & Trust Co [1921] 188 N.Y.S 162.
33. Ocean Bank of Miami v La Esquina Presidential, Inc., 623 So. 2d 520, 520 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1993).
34. Tosco Corp. v. Federal Deposit Insur. Corp., 723 F.2d 1242, 1247 (6th Cir. 1983).
35. United Bank Ltd v Banque Nationale de Paris [1992] 2 S.L.R. 64.
 
Legal Research Quarterly
Volume 20, Issue 80
February 2018
Pages 259-282

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 14 May 2017
  • Revise Date: 24 February 2018
  • Accept Date: 23 August 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics