• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.49-70
• /
• 2020

Purpose - The UCP is recognized as the governing law for L/C transactions, but it covers only the general details of the transaction and does not cover all complex practices. In view of this limitation, this paper examines a negotiation transaction which is most actively utilized in L/C transactions via a thorough review of the UCP provisions, analyzes the problems of the negotiation clause in the UCP, and suggests appropriate countermeasures to deal with unnecessary litigation costs. By doing so, the parties involved in the negotiation transaction would be able to avoid financial costs such as having to pay for lawsuits. Design/methodology - The present study first differentiates the general types of L/Cs (e.g., sight payment L/C, deferred payment L/C, acceptance L/C, and negotiation L/C), explains and the Article 2 and Article 12(b) of the UCP 600 where the term 'negotiation' is used, digs into the drawbacks of 'negotiation' occurring under the UCP 600, and discusses solutions to the problems found by analyzing the drawbacks descriptively. Findings - After a review of the UCP provisions on negotiation in detail, several possible problems which may occur in practice were discovered. First, as the UCP stipulates, the negotiating bank will want to delay payment to the maximum extent possible and make payment on the banking day on which the issuing bank reimburses the amount. This may lead the beneficiary towards bankruptcy or put it in financial crisis. Second, when a fraudulent transaction occurs, the negotiating bank can neither request the issuing bank to reimburse nor can it exercise its recourse right against the beneficiary because it has obtained all the rights of the beneficiary by purchasing the documents. Third, there is a practice in which the beneficiary sells the documents to its transaction bank which is not the nominated bank if the nominated bank specified in the credit is located in a third country or the exporter has no relationship with the nominated bank in the credit. In this case, whether to accept this and reimburse the non-nominated negotiating bank entirely depends on the issuing bank's decision even though such practice frequently occurs in Korea. Originality/value - There has been little research effort pertaining to negotiation transactions in detail even though negotiation L/C transactions account for around 70% in world trade notwithstanding deferred payment L/Cs and acceptance L/Cs that are also negotiated in practice. Thus, if the negotiations clause under the UCP 600 provisions were reviewed and the drawbacks of the negotiation transactions most actively used in L/C transactions were identified and examined, specific countermeasures could ultimately help smoothen the operation of L/C transactions and prevent financial losses.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권3호
• /
• pp.161-189
• /
• 2006

This paper is aiming at analyzing case law of India in relation with reasonable time to make decision whether to accept or to refuse the documents received from the presenter in credit transactions. As specified in UCP, the failure to refuse to accept the documents within a reasonable time precludes the Issuing Bank, Confirming Bank (if any) and Nominated Bank from asserting that they are discrepant. Compliance of the stipulated documents on their face with the terms and conditions of the credit shall be determined by international standard banking practice as reflected in this Articles of UCP 500. The Issuing bank is only to be held responsible for honoring the documents presented by beneficiary through the nominated banks if they are strictly in compliance with terms and conditions of the Credit. As any well experienced banker knows, however, a word-by-word, letter-by-letter correspondence between the documents and the credit terms means a practical impossibility. Thus the notion of reasonable care in conjunction with the doctrine of strict compliance mixed with International Standard Banking Practices has not played a right functional standard for checking the documents as stipulated in the credit and UCP 500. And so the rejection rate is highly estimated at approximately 50% in EU and 40 to 70% according to their geographical locations in the USA. As a result, it can possibly be inferred from this fact that the credit industry would be facing the functional failure as the international trade credit facility, if not supported with motive power as a relevant scheme in UCP 500. It is quite important to note that UCP 500 Article 13(b) which specify the time limit for the banks to notify the presenter their decision not to accept the documents within a reasonable time not to exceed seven banking days following the day of receipt of documents would be the motive engine to improve the negotiability of documents in international trade financial facility.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.261-301
• /
• 2016

Recently the abusive calls on on-demand bonds have been a critical issue among many engineering and construction companies in Korea. On-demand bond is referred to as an independent guarantee in the sense that the guarantee is independent from its underlying contract although it was issued based on such underlying contract. For this reason, the issuing bank is not required to and/or entitled to look into whether there really is a breach of underlying contract in relation to the call on demand-bonds. Due to this kind of principle of independence, the applicant has to run the risk of the on demand bond being called by the beneficiary without due grounds. Only where the call proves to be fraudulent or abusive in a very clear way, the issuing bank would not be obligated to pay the bond proceeds for the call on on-demand bonds. In order to prevent the issuing bank from paying the proceeds under the on-demand bond, the applicant usually files with its competent court an application for injunction prohibiting the beneficiary from calling against the issuing bank. However, it is in practice difficult for the applicant to prove the beneficiary's call on the bond to be fraudulent since the courts in almost all the jurisdictions of advanced countries require very strict and objective evidences such as the documents which were signed by the owner (beneficiary) or any other third party like the engineer. There is another way of preventing the beneficiary from calling on the bond, which is often utilized especially in the United Kingdom or Western European countries such as Germany. Based upon the underlying contract, the contractor which is at the same time the applicant of on-demand bond requests the court to order the owner (the beneficiary) not to call on the bond. In this case, there apparently seems to be no reason why the court should apply the strict fraud rule to determine whether to grant an injunction in that the underlying legal relationship was created based on a construction contract rather than a bond. However, in most jurisdictions except for United Kingdom and Singapore, the court also applies the strict fraud rule on the ground that the parties promised to make the on-demand bond issued under the construction contract. This kind of injunction is highly unlikely to be utilized on the international level because it is very difficult in normal situations to establish the international jurisdiction towards the beneficiary which will be usually located outside the jurisdiction of the relevant court. This kind of injunction ordering the owner not to call on the bond can be rendered by the arbitrator as well even though the arbitrator has no coercive power for the owner to follow it. Normally there would be no arbitral tribunal existing at the time of the bond being called. In this case, the emergency arbitrator which most of the international arbitration rules such as ICC, LCIA and SIAC, etc. adopt can be utilized. Finally, the contractor can block the issuing bank from paying the bond proceeds by way of a provisional attachment in case where it also has rights to claim some unpaid interim payments or damages. This is the preservative measure under civil law system, which the lawyers from common law system are not familiar with. As explained in this article, it is very difficult to block the issuing bank from paying in response to the bond call by the beneficiary even if the call has no valid ground under the underlying construction contract. Therefore, it is necessary for the applicants who are normally engineering and construction companies to be prudent to make on-demand bonds issued. They need to take into account the creditability of the project owner as well as trustworthiness of the judiciary system of the country where the owner is domiciled.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제42권2호
• /
• pp.205-225
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 신용장거래에서 불일치서류에 대한 은행의 지급거절통지의 절차를 한·중 판례를 중심으로 고찰한다. 한·중 무역거래 비중이 높은 상황에서 한국 기업과 신용장을 개설하는 우리나라 은행들이 서류심사 결과로서 지급거절을 통지함에 있어 주의해야 하는 사항들과 신용장 관련 분쟁을 해결하기 위한 방안에 대한 제언을 목적으로 한다. 본 연구에서 고찰한 판례는 중국 매도인이 개설은행을 상대로 중국법원에 소를 제기한 것으로, 개설은행의 지급거절통지가 UCP 600 제16조 (c)항 (ii) (iii)의 내용적인 요건을 충족하지 못한다고 판시한 중국법원의 판결이다. 본 판결을 볼 때, 우리나라 기업들과 신용장 개설은행들은 첫째, UCP 600 제16조 (c)항의 규정에 근거하여 하자에 대한 통지의 내용을 자세하게 기재해야 한다. 둘째, 신용장 계약에서도 무역계약 마찬가지로 준거법에 대한 합의를 명확히 하는 것이 필요하다. 셋째, 한·중거래에서 중국법원의 편파적인 판결과 더불어 외국법원의 판결이 중국에서 집행이 어려운 점을 감안해서 분쟁해결 방식으로 중재를 활용하는 것이다. 신용장 개설 시 중재조항을 삽입하여 법적인 효력을 갖도록 하고, 국제신용장중재센터나 DOCDEX 시스템을 활용하는 것을 권고한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.563-579
• /
• 2000

Until July 1, 1996, no international rules, other than the simple practices contained in the UCP 500 have existed for the processing of bank-to-bank reimbursements. At last, ICC Uniform Rules for Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements under Documentary Credits(Pub. No. 525) have been published on July 1, 1996. Our country have adopted the URR 525 on August 1996. But in view of the present number of countries adopted the URR 525, I think our country is very impetuous. In order to comprehend the URR 525 correctly, this study is carrying out to clarify the legal principles on reimbursements among issuing banks, nominated banks, unauthorized banks. Secondly, this study is carrying out indicate the background of establishing, the main contents, the approval and the criticism of URR 525. Finally, this study is carrying out to point out the matters that demand special attention about the operation of URR 525

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.149-168
• /
• 2007

e-Trade Payment system has been transformed by quickly and effectively. The e-trade Payment system such as TradeCard System, Bolero Surf, Identrus Eleanor and e-Escrow and e-letter of Credit issued by SWIFT System enable partly sellers, buyers and service providers. This paper studies for SWIFT, Surf, TradeCard, Eleanor, e-Escrow as international trade payment, As reason following : The First, Bolero is a neutral secure platform enabling paperless trading between exporter, importer, and their logistics service and bank partners, insurance company. The Second, TradeCard is to manage procurement-to-payment worldwide, that is exporter, importer and connected partners, paperless platform. The Third, Identrus is the global leader in trusted identity solutions, recognized by global financial institutions, commercial organizations and bank partners around the world. The Forth, Escrow payment have effect to L/C issue and enter into electronic contracts in internet bank. Trader practice use Escrow Bank as the same bank that rules to Issuing Bank and Advising Bank and payment, acceptance. This paper of these electronic payment have studies new international trade payment to approach such as eUCP rules and TradeCard System, Surf of bolero, eleanor of Identrus, SWIFT.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제45권
• /
• pp.85-109
• /
• 2010

L/C provides the exporter and the importer with safe assurance in the exchange of goods for payment in international trade. It involves a number of parties. Although the parties may have confidence in their client, bad faith or ignorance of international banking practice by any of these parties could cause the failure of transaction, which makes international trade a risky business. Most of the risks are found in transport document, which can cause disputes. There are many factors in the risk of transport documents under L/C transaction. One most common risk factor for the beneficiary in all transport documents is even if there is no discrepancy in document, the issuing bank or the applicant refuses to pay or delay payment insisting there is a discrepancy. In some very rare cases, the beneficiary may not get paid due to unfair injunction of the local court of the applicant. For the applicant, most common risk factors are fake bill and fraud. Risks classified according to the sorts of transport documents are as follows. 1. In B/L, payment can be refused because it is regarded as charter party B/L, although there is no real charter party contract. And the applicant can bear the potential risk of the loss or deterioration of cargo through transhipment of the cargo loaded on board in container if transhipment is prohibited without excluding of UCP 600 article 20 (c). 2. In charter party B/L, the applicant may take delivery without paying when charter party B/L is signed by charterer, which can result in a big loss for the beneficiary and the negotiating bank. And risks may arise when cargo is seized because the charterer does not pay the hire. The applicant and the issuing bank are also vulnerable to a risk - Against whom should they file a suit when cargo gets damaged during transportation? 3. In multimodal transport document, which is subject to a conflict because there is a big difference in viewpoints between transport industry and banks, conflicts may also arise when L/C requires ocean B/L and accepts multimodal transport document at the same time, but does not specify the details. 4. In air waybill, where the consignee is not the issuing bank but the applicant, risks may take place to the beneficiary when the applicant takes delivery but refuses to pay asserting minor discrepancies in document. The applicant may also bear the risk when cargo may not be loaded because air waybill is a received bill. Another risk may arise when although the applicant prohibits transhipment without excluding UCP 600 article 23 (c), the cargo may be transhipped, provided that the entire carriage is covered by one and the same air waybill.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제36권
• /
• pp.29-46
• /
• 2007

The fraud exception rule allows for the issuing bank to dishonor the claim if it the documents and transactions bear fraud though the documents presented are complied with the terms and conditions of the letter of credit. A question arises whether the fraud exception rule can apply to innocent beneficiary when fraud is made by 3rd party. United City Merchants v. Royal Bank of Canada showed a good example how to handle in case of innocent beneficiary. At this case House of Lord found that innocent beneficiary deserves payment applying nullity exception rule. I believe that the nullity exception rule is employed for the benefit of innocent beneficiary as far as the issuer and applicant get no actual damage by the 3rd party's fraudulent action which is shown on documents.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제50권
• /
• pp.89-108
• /
• 2011

This work intends to study some issues in relation to the cancellation and amendment of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the cancellation are the significance and formation time of cancellation of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of cancellation of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the amendment are the significance and formation requirements of amendment of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of amendment of letter of credit. If exporters receive letters of credit from foreign countries, they must confirm the indication of irrevocable letter of credit. When they find revocable letters of credit, they should amend the credits to be irrevocable credits. If issuing banks amend letters of credit against beneficiaries, the banks should receive the beneficiaries' consent. If amendments devalue applicants' expectations in the underlying transaction, the applicants for whom the credit issues are not liable to reimburse. Beneficiaries and issuing banks may amend a credit, but the issuing bank acts at its own peril if it does not obtain the applicant's consent.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.417-440
• /
• 2020

The coronavirus pandemic of 2019-20 confronted fiscally dominant regimes around the world with the question of whether the large deficits caused by the health crisis should be monetized or financed by issuing debt. The unpleasant monetarist arithmetic of Sargent and Wallace (1981) states that in a fiscally dominant regime tighter money now can cause higher inflation in the future. In spite of the qualifier 'unpleasant,' this result is positive in nature, and, therefore, void of normative content. I analyze conditions under which it is optimal in a welfare sense for the central bank to delay inflation by issuing debt to finance part of the fiscal deficit. The analysis is conducted in the context of a model in which the aforementioned monetarist arithmetic holds, in the sense that if the government finds it optimal to delay inflation, it does so knowing that it would result in higher inflation in the future. The central result of the paper is that delaying inflation is optimal when the fiscal deficit is expected to decline over time.