indication of number of originals issued in Non Negotiable S

[Balajikas]

Hi

Can anyone clarify UCP Article 21 require indication of number of originals issued in Non Negotiable Seaway Bill ?

If a transport document is capable of transferring by endorsement (Negotiable) , indication of number of originals is a mandatory because merchant may secure release of goods by presenting at least one original.

Non Negotiable Seaway bill to be used when shipment is by sea under a short journey and requires to be issued in a Non nego form (consignee must be identified i.e straight consignment).

Appreciate if someone clarifies on this please

Balajikas@rediffmail.com

[picant]

Hi Pal,

Art 21 a iv, is clear: if the sea waybill is issued in more than one original, full set must be presented. You correctly say "but if it is straight consigned"? The problem, IMHO, is that, with an original document, the shipper can modify delivery terms, instructing properlythe carrier untill goods are in the hands of the consignee. In the previous UCP 500, it was advised to clause Sea waybill "NO DISP"(or CONTROL) to prohibit amendment to original transports conditions.


Hoping to have been clear.
Ciao

[Balajikas]

Hi Ciao

Many thanks. But still I am not clear about this requirement. Can you please explain what is the need of article 21 when article 20 is exactly the same & title is not important for any transport document under ucp rules (however named).

Rgds
Balaji.kas

[shahriar]

dear balaji,

the answer is rather very simple. here is a quote from commentary on UCP 600

During the revision process, the Drafting Group compared the content of UCP 500 articles 23 and 24. The comparison highlighted what we all knew, namely that there was no difference in the wording except that whenever the words “bill of lading” appeared in article 23, the words “non-negotiable sea waybill” appeared in article 24. At one point, the Drafting Group combined the two articles into one. However, responses from ICC national committees asserted that it was unwise to combine in one article of the rules a document which is, in most cases, a negotiable document (the bill of lading) and, on the other hand, a document which bears in its title words to the effect that it is non-negotiable (the non-negotiable sea waybill). The decision was then taken to remain with what existed under UCP 500 and to have a separate article for the non-negotiable sea waybill.

so...

In the previous UCP 500, it was advised to clause Sea waybill "NO DISP"(or CONTROL) to prohibit amendment to original transports conditions.

dear picant, would be grateful if you could please provide me the reference. i dont have any in my collection.

[picant]

Hi Pals,

in effect this sentence is on a ABI Italian Bankers Association Commentary, but it is also illustrated in "The merchants guide-2003 issue" by P&O Nedlloyd.
Probably reflects the fact that the new article in UCP 500 had been inserted on Transport Industry Commission.
I will try to investigate to find the original source.
Thanks

Ciao

[Balajikas]

Hi Shahriar

Many thanks..

Non-negotiable seaway bill by its nature is "NON NEGOTIABLE". As scuh right to receive the goods can not be transferred by endorsement and delivery.

UCP require insertion of number of originals issued on a transport document ONLY when document is capable of transferring by endorsement. For example: BL, Charter party BL and Multimodal transport doc. Incase of Air way bill, Road Transport doc insertion of number of originals issued is not required.

My question is when "non negotiable seaway bill" is not capable of transerring by endorsement & original document is not required to delivery of the goods at port of discharge, the words under 21-iv "BE THE FULL SET AS INDICATED ON THE NON-NEGOTIABLE SEAWAY BILL" may be meaning less. Instead, insertion of similar words under Art 23 V (be the original for consignor or shipper, even if the credit stipulates a full set of originals" may be appropriate.

Rgds
Balaji.kas

[21vita]

Commentary on UCP600 seems a good book, where can i buy it.....any one can tell me