Notations and Multimodal Transport Documents

Home

Trade News

Articles

E-mail

Monday, 13 December 2010 18:22

In the autumn 2009 issue of DCInsight, Haluk Erdemol tackled on board notations as they apply to a B/L and
multimodal transport documents (multimodal bills of lading). This is perhaps the most controversial issue that has
emerged in UCP 600 so far, and his article was an excellent contribution to the ongoing debate, which hopefully
will be resolved some time soon. Here I would like to add some personal comments.
Bill of lading
First, it is unfortunate that this confusion took place, as it was, in my view,
clearly avoidable. It is a well-known fact that UCP pavel

500 article 23 provided clear guidance in saying: "If the bill of lading indicates a place of receipt or taking in charge different from the port of loading, the on board notation must also include the port of loading stipulated in the Credit and the name of the vessel on which goods have been loaded, even if they have been loaded on the vessel named in the bill of lading." Sub-article 23 (a) (iii) (a) of UCP 500 also clearly allowed a bill of lading to show a place of taking in charge different from the port of loading, and/or a place of final destination different from the port of discharge. ISBP 645 paragraph 82 further explained that if the Container Yard (CY) or Container Freight Station (CFS) is stated as the place of receipt, and that place is
the same as the stated port of loading, these places (place of receipt and the port of loading) would not be considered as different, and consequently the inclusion of the named vessel and port of loading in the on board notation would not be necessary. This clarification does not appear in the updated ISBP 681.
The intention behind these apparent changes (or omissions) in the UCP 600 and ISBP 681 has not been explained in a timely fashion to the banking community. Naturally, this led to confusion with some believing there was an intention to
treat the matter differently under the new UCP (why otherwise was there a change?); and others claiming that it was
only a change in the drafting style and not in the underlying rules for examination.
In its Commentary to UCP 600, the UCP Drafting Group explains that the reason for changes in the wording was "not to
encourage" the use of the "place of receipt" and "place of final destination" on bills of lading covering ocean transport.
But the requirement that the document checker must be able to determine that the bill of lading appears to indicate that
the shipped on board statement (by pre-printed wording or by a separate notation) relates to loading on board the
named vessel at the port of loading stated in the credit, and not to any pre-carriage of the goods between a place of receipt and the port of loading, remains the same as it has been under UCP 500.

The Drafting Group's desire "not to encourage the use of the place of
receipt on bill of lading" is understandable. It seems pretty strange when
the credit requires only ocean transport from a port of loading to a port of
discharge, that the bill of lading should show the place of receipt at all. If
the place of receipt is the same as port of loading, and the only difference
is that the place of receipt is a CY or CFS, then it seems reasonable. In
most cases, containers are received by carriers at these places. The bill of lading is released to the shipper only when the goods are on board the
named vessel.
But if the place of receipt is very far from the port of loading, say at adistant inland place, then it is likely that the document is actually a multimodal transport document. Usually, the document itself makes this quite clear.

Pavel Andrle discusses technical LC
details with an eBSI consulting client.

For instance, if a document is entitled "Bill of Lading for Combined (Multimodal) Transport Shipment or Port to Port Shipment" and indicates that the "Place of Receipt" and/or "Place of Delivery" fields are to be filled in only in case the document is used as a combined (multimodal) transport document, should we accept a multimodal transport document in cases when the credit requires a bill of lading covering only a port-to-port transport?
It would be nice to receive "true ocean transport bills of lading
only" when a credit requires a bill of lading covering port-to-port
transport. However, in practice, especially in the case of landlocked exporters, shippers arrange the transport with one major carrier, which organizes both the land transport from the inland place to the port of loading and then transport from the port of loading to the port of discharge or even the final place of destination.

Practice
It would be simple if the transport from the inland place of receipt to the port of loading were covered by one transport
document, say a road transport document, and the port-to-port transport (as requested by the credit) by an ocean bill
of lading. In such a case, the bill of lading would not show the place of receipt as the inland place at all
(why should it?). However, in practice the carrier issues only one transport document: a multimodal transport
document, since that is what he is responsible for. He does not often understand why the shipper wants him to add a separate dated on board notation with the named vessel and the port of loading and, in some cases, he does not
actually want to comply with this specific request since, by doing so, he actually "converts" the multimodal transport document into a bill of lading.
Certainly we accept documents as compliant when the credit requests a bill of lading covering ocean transport only.
We do not concern ourselves too much with the pre-carriage (from the place of receipt to the port of loading), provided
it isevident that the goods were shipped on the named vessel at the port of loading. If the place of receipt differs from
the port of loading (see above) and the bill of lading shows also a pre-carriage means of conveyance (for instance a truck), an on board notation (shipment date, vessel name, port of loading) is necessary. It would be necessary even if
the pre-printed wording indicates "shipped on board." If the transport document expressly indicates that the "shipped
on board" statement relates to any truck, wagon or any other means of conveyance on which goods are shipped from
the place of receipt on the way to the port of loading, than the extended on board notation (showing shipment date,
vessel name, port of loading) would be also requested.
Do we, as bankers, accept a bill of lading showing a place of final destination different (not just CY or CFS) from the port of discharge? Under UCP 500 we clearly did; under UCP 600 we do as well, even without clear guidance in UCP 600 or ISBP 681. It may seem strange that we accept a transport document which shows that the goods will go to Prague when what we wanted was for the goods to be delivered only to the port of discharge, say, Hamburg. But we do.
Multimodal transport
Neither article 26 of UCP 500 nor article 19 of UCP 600 clearly state that a pavel-lect

multimodal transport document must show that the goods were "shipped on
board" the named vessel in the port of loading if the transport begins by ocean transport from the port of loading stipulated in the credit (as the starting point of
the shipment). This issue was very problematic under UCP 500, which is why many of us constantly raised the issue during the UCP revision process.
Sub-article 19 (a) (ii) of UCP 600 requires a multimodal transport document to:
"indicate that the goods have been dispatched, taken in charge or shipped on
board at the place stated in the credit". It is argued that if the multimodal transport starts with ocean transport (from the port of loading as requested in the credit), then it should show that the goods were shipped on board a named vessel at the port of loading stated in the credit. However, since UCP 600 does not clearly say so, one might argue that the multimodal transport document might just show that
the goods were dispatched or taken in charge in the port of loading.

In the case of multimodal transport, delivery terms such as FCA, CPT or CIP should preferably be used, as these are a perfect match for the "goods being dispatched or taken in charge".
Many recent Banking Commission opinions made it clear that if the multimodal transport starts at the port of loading stated in the credit, the multimodal transport document must show that the goods have been shipped on board a named vessel at the port of loading stated therein. This may not be ideal, but provided this interpretation is clear and well communicated, it is acceptable.
If the applicant wants a multimodal transport document to show that the transport starts at the port of loading with goods being taken in charge only (as opposed to being shipped on a named vessel), he or she can do so by inserting a clear request in the credit. If the credit shows a port, e.g., Hamburg port, as the place of receipt, then in my view the multimodal transport document might well show that the goods have only been taken in charge in the Hamburg port.
It should be made perfectly clear that if the multimodal transport starts by ocean transport at the port of loading as stated in the credit, the requirements for the multimodal transport document in relation to "shipped on board at the place stated in the
credit" must be exactly the same as those for the bill of lading as set out in article 20. In other words, if the multimodal transport document shows a place of receipt different from the port of loading (see above) and also shows the pre-carriage means of conveyance, an on board notation is required (indicating the shipment date, name of the vessel and port of loading). If the multimodal transport document shows a qualification to the vessel as "intended", a separate dated on board notation with the name of the actual vessel is required. If the multimodal transport document shows a qualification of the port of
loading as "intended", a separate dated on board notation with the name of the actual vessel and port of loading is required.
ICC rules are rules of practice. Their goal must be to provide practitioners with clear guidelines to do their jobs. In this case, the clarity called for has, up to this point, been lacking.
Article originally published in DCInsight Vol. 16 No.1 January - March 2010 by Pavel Andrle. Pavel Andrle is an international trade finance consultant and trainer for eBSI Export Academy and Secretary of the Banking Commission of ICC Czech Republic. His e-mail is This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

eBSI TradeBrief Download

Click image to download PDF!

See all Tradebriefs available for download!

Info request and newsletter sign-up!

Request More Information

First name:

Last name:

Age in years:

Your email:

City:

Country:

Mobile:

Home:

Select a course/program:

Preferred field of study:

Highest Level of Education:

Question / Comments

Write the characters in the image

eBSI TradeBrief Sign-up

RSS Feed

International Trade News Feed

Testimonials

I found the entire course very beneficial as it allowed me to get a better knowledge of certain areas that were relatively new to our company. I also found the workshops and online sessions very interesting as they provided me with the opportunity to interact with the other participants and to hear their opinions on the topics discussed. The continuous assessment was an excellent method of reinforcing a lot of the material that I had studied on the CD Roms. The availability of a forum of the website is an excellent idea for any future queries that we may have and to keep up to date with the latest developments.

Trevor Currid, Tractech (Ireland) Ltd. Sligo, Ireland
ITS Graduate
I wanted to thank you for your time and effort in teaching a course with such an extensive array of topics! The International Trade Specialist Accreditation Programme has at last given me the chance to learn and implement new skills in the area of International Trade and Finance as well as interesting components on Marketing and eBusiness. You have indeed opened my eyes to a world of new possibilities for my career, for which I thank you.

Melvin Bamuh, Consumer Banking Manager, Union Bank – Douala, Cameroon.
ITS Graduate

“I get in contact with Mr. Smith during my studies at the eBSI Export Academy. I want to say, that Mr. Thomas Smith is a well-educated, intelligent and the high quality specialist. He not only perfectly understands international trade and marketing and has wide experience, but also can explain and teach in the accessible form all interested persons.”

Olga Safronova Independent Law Practice Professional

I have no doubt that my attendance at EBSI was an exiting but most of all a very useful experience. The course complimented my more theoretical third level studies. I liked the way the topics were taught and these practical methods (especially the graphical representations) made issues clearer and more accessible to the learner. The evaluation techniques were very well developed. I especially appreciated the ways the Incoterms were explained and the Online sessions.
In conclusion I can say that it was a very, very useful experience for me... especially that the ITS Accreditation compliments so well my Academy diploma!
Thanks a lot for that wonderful opportunity!!!

Viorica Grab, Consultant TDI and Managing Director, Moldovan Export Promotion Organisation, Moldova.
ITS Graduate
I much appreciate ITS Accreditation Programme. I learnt a lot of things which were new for me. The teaching method and the structure of presentation of the studied material are both very good and convenient for students. And also I appreciate very good attitude of the tutors towards students that really helps to get over the difficulties. I'm sure that the Certificate will help me in my future career.

Lyudmila Rylova, WestLB Bank, Moscow, Russia
ITS Graduate
My experiences with the team from eBSI were second to none, I found the ITS Accreditation extremely informative &amp; interesting with a very high level of professionalism maintained throughout duration of course. The online sessions proved that a ‘class room’ environment can be achieved at your work desk or home study, while the occasional group meetings provided fantastic Q&amp;A opportunities with the eBSI tutors.(and fellow students)
A very worth while and enjoyable experience.

Damien Finnerty, Traffic Supervisor, AVID Technology, Dublin, Ireland
ITS Graduate
I am currently undertaking the international trade specialist course delivered by elearning by the electronic business school of Ireland. It so far I can say that I like the course materials and the online support structure which allows me to fit my learning in when it is convenient for me. This is especially important for me given my many tasks in Nigerian Export Import Bank and other activities. I find the Finance course especially practical since I can post technical questions on forums and receive replies from ICC experts.

Dr. Iboko Imo Iboko, Director, Nigerian Export Import Bank, Abuja, Nigeria
ITS Graduate

<head> head>

“I enjoyed this international trade course very much. It helped my to be promoted in my job. eBSI Tutors were always in the right place, helping us all the time and giving updated materials. I want to thank you once again for being perfect teachers.

Lika Dzneladze, Head of Trade Finance Unit at JSC VTB Bank Georgia.

“I recommend eBSI and the work he has developed on the ITS program. I took the program about two years ago and it is a very well designed program which will give a sound knowledge on Export Market, E-commerce, Finance. It is very flexible and with a lot of support and a virtual campus where you can bring comments into it or enter the forum and read other users comments and discussions.
It is a home-based program which you can follow on your own time.
I really recommend the program to anybody interested in Export and the different issues around it.”

Accountant, Forensic Consultant, Fraud Examiner and Counter Fraud Specialist, UK

This exciting programme provides participants with a detailed insight into the steps, rules and procedures required to develop and operate a successful export and import business. I would like to thank Mr Vincent O'Brien for his support which played a large part in my success and helped me win the Enterprise Ireland Gold Medal for best overall results.

Enterprise Ireland Gold Medal Winner

Alex Dymov, MD, Ru-Soft, Moscow, Russia
ITS Graduate