Whether a b/l should be treated as CPB/L

Trang · Post by **Trang** » Sat Jan 30, 2010 3:19 pm

A credit calls for a marine bill of lading and the B/L presented appeared to comply with the requirements of the credit and article 20 of UCP600 except that B/L show a pre-printed wording: "Issued pursuant to charter party dated...". But the date not be inserted. Should this document be treated as a charter party bill of lading?
I shall be grateful for your opinions.

LCstudent · Post by **LCstudent** » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:16 pm

Dear Trang ! I´d say - yes - treat it as a Charter party B/L, as Art. 22 a UCP 600 says: quote "A bill of lading, however named, containing an INDICATION that it is subject to a charter party..."unquote, but it seems contradictory that a marine B/L shall also be used as a CP B/L, as Art. 20 a clearly stipulates the name of the carrier, which is not foreseen under Art. 22. I think this documentation is somehow uncommon. other views highly appreciated. Rgds LCStudent.

ORUNMILA · Post by **ORUNMILA** » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:36 am

hi all
since the credit calls for a marine bill of lading; the b/l can only be accepeted if the credit indicate: "charter party bill of lading allowed" for not for nothing did aticle 20a(vi) says: contain no indication that it is subject to a charterd party''

other comments welcome
Orunmila

Phani Krishna · Post by **Phani Krishna** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:22 pm

Trang wrote:A credit calls for a marine bill of lading and the B/L presented appeared to comply with the requirements of the credit and article 20 of UCP600 except that B/L show a pre-printed wording: "Issued pursuant to charter party dated...". But the date not be inserted. Should this document be treated as a charter party bill of lading?
I shall be grateful for your opinions.

I think the document cannot be treated as a charter party bill of lading.
excuse i am wrong in it and let me know if you find the exact reason for that.

nesarul · Post by **nesarul** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:38 pm

Dear,
If we read commentary of UCP 600 page 90, we can confer the meaning of the word "no indication"

The term “no indication” means that a bill of lading that bears any indication that it is subject to a charter party would not be acceptable under this article. As examples of “no indication”, the bill of lading may state “to be used with charter parties” or it could contain the following data: “freight payable as per charter party” or “charter party contract number ABC123”.

.
here one may make an argument that here the word no indication is not applicable because of absence of dates after indication of charter party bill of lading. for that reason we may consider ICC official opinion R647 or [TA662 REV] 2005-2008. we may also consider TA608 rev based on UCP 500 for the same reference.
hence No indication means any indication whether it is completed or not.
this document is discrepant.
regards
nesar

Whether a b/l should be treated as CPB/L

Whether a b/l should be treated as CPB/L

Marine B/L versus Charter party B/L

does lc indicate CP B/L allowed?

Whether a BL should be treated as CPBL

Whether a BL should be treated as CPBL