Page 1 of 1
packing is not sufficient for sea shipment
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:10 pm
by shahriar
dear all,
if any document, other than the transport document shows that packing is not sufficient for sea journey while LC and bill of lading is silent on this issue, will you count this as a discrepancy?
additional info
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:41 pm
by heresvijay
No it's not a disc. It's an additional info mentioned in other docs and we can disregard it. Only transport doc has to be considered for this issue.
To be or not to be?
Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:37 pm
by cristiand969
Dear Shahriar,
This question is like <<living on the edge>>
Although UCP600 & ISBP describe under what conditions a transport documents should be clean (details given) it may be well questioned by issuing bank whether or not documents are in conflict with one another. I would refer to the fact that one documents show an 'unclean shipment' while transport document actually shows 'clean shipment' . Unless other document shows a repackaging of the goods before shipment I would refrain from telling you that this presentation conform.
Other comments really appreciated.
Comment found
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:29 am
by picant
Hi Pals,
I found something by ICC about goods status in a document different from a transport document. Doc. 470/TA 239 dd 08 march 1999, in Pubb. 613/2000 case no 339.
An L/C called for a Delivery Acceptance Report , document presented indicated that part of goods were no sound. ICC stated that as per art 21 UCP500,( now 14 f UCP600) without a clear indication in the L/C, the document had to be accepted.
My Working Group stated : Caution!!
Any other comments appreciated
Ciao
there is a different situation
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:00 pm
by sunny
While I agree with picant in what he has said, the situation is not the same and I cannot agree with in answering to this topic. When you have different document required it is clear that the opinions are very different, sometimes opposite.
I also came across with an ICC opinion whereby it was required to provide a solution where a Certificate of Quality was required. That certificate said that inspection has been done and goods are not fit for human consumption. The ICC opinion found document compliant although goods were indeed destined for the people and not for animals.
packing?
Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:54 pm
by iLC
well i think the job of a packing list is to describe the packing of merchandise and this packing list has done that. so the packing list itself is not discrepant. about cristian's view on clean shipment, i think i will agree only to the extent that the packing list shows "packing is not sufficient for sea journey" not very sure though.
if it simply declare a defective packing then i will not consider it as a conflict.