A certificate without signature

[Negotiator]

Dear all,

The following case arouses my curiosity so I need to hear experts' opinions.

The L/C requires a certificate of analysis without further conditions in detail, and presented certificate of analysis (in a paper medium) shows at the bottom of it :
...
This document is generated by a validated system and therefore not signed.
(Name of person authorized to sign)
(Title of person authorized to sign)

That's all. No signature appears to be added to the document actually. The credit does not contain any statement that it is subject to eUCP.
In this case, can a bank insist that such a document is discrepant because it does not bear any signature? (As you know, ISBP Paragraph 37 states : "Even if not stated in the credit, drafts, certificates and declarations by their nature require a signature.")

And one more thing, would the answer be different if that certificate appears to be issued by beneficiary in this situation?

Kindly ask your opinions...
Regards.
Lee

[Ella]

Hi, Lee,

Unfortunately, I think it is so . Unless this certificate is contained in another document bearing signature and then that certification does not require separate signature, which is not the case, as as I understand from your presentation. What "validated system" means? How can you prove it is original,mmm, it must be something coming from this "validated system"...Ask the issuer.Is this certificate issued as being part of a bigger document and somewhere there is a signature? If it is not I'm not sure you can convince the bank that it is not discrepancy, they have the standard in their hand and the UCP and indeed ISBP art 37 says what you mentioned.

Wish you good luck in solving the problem and all the best.

Kind regards,
Ella

[mia vervacke]

I would consider the document as discrepant if there is no form of authentication (cfr art. 3 UCP600) present.

Article 3 of UCP 600 'Interpretations' says

'A document may be signed by handwriting, facsimile signature, perforated signature, stamp, symbol or any other mechanical or
electronic method of authentication.

.
This document is meant to be an electronic document and when used in its electronic form need not be signed.
When printed out on paper it needs a signature to be valid.

The UCP 600 was not specifically designed for electronic documents.
The eUCP on the contrary is a supplement to the UCP that, when used in conjunction with the UCP, will provide the necessary rules for the presentation of the electronic equivalents of paper documents under letters of credit.

[pablo]

Is there by chance a bar code?
rgds

[Negotiator]

Many thanks, all

Ella, I'm in the issuing bank's position in fact, however, I really appreciate for your comment. The analysis certificate in question was an independent document, contents of which were not included in another document.

mia vervacke, I think you gave me an excellent explanation and analysis. It is very reasonable.

pablo, The document does not contain even a bar code, label or similar things. Indeed, there is nothing to make me determine that it is signed (except for the statement : "This document is generated by a validated system and therefore not signed.").

All of your opinions are very helpful for me Thank you so much!

Regards.
Lee.

[iLC]

i found the question very interesting indeed. to me the reason behind any signature is to authenticate it and whether any certificate requires any signature depends on the content and mode of authentication related to it.

from the discussion, i believe its a document produced by an independent authority; of course certifying something.

This document is generated by a validated system and therefore not signed.
(Name of person authorized to sign)
(Title of person authorized to sign)

the first line is very interesting. does generated by validated system means authenticated? hummmm... related question; SWIFT validation and authentication; are these two same? in my opinion no. it continues.. therefore not signed. does this mean "need not to be singed"? again my answer would be "no".

if there is no need for a signature, why there is a place for signature? in fact for courier receipt, even when not presented as a transport document, is required to be singed if it has a place for signature.

we also need to understand that "be signed" and signature is not the same. while authentication (be signed) can be in various form, ISBP especially asked for "signature".

in my opinion, the document is discrepant. comments appreciated

[pablo]

for me is "validated system" only inside the issuing firm (internal purpose)
The document in a letter of credit is discrepant !!
ciao