国际贸易实务双语示范课案例精选全文

际贸易实务双语示范课案例精选［全文］国际贸易实务（双语）案例集山东工商学院中加学院国际贸易教研室2009-8目录1【Case1】CIForNot?2【Case2】CFR&ShippingNotice3【Case3】CFR&GoodsQuality4【Case4】ThebuyerdelaysthesendingofthevesselunderFOB1></a>.5【Case5】Damagecausedbyseriousqualitymistake6【Case6】Fraudbyqualityclause8【Case7】Thebuyerrefusestotakedeliverybecauseofshortage9【Case8】Damagecausedbyimproperpacking10【Case9】Missingaddressindocumentarycollection11【Case10】RefusalofpaymentunderD/P12【Case11】AdisputecausedbyD/A13【Case12】D/PchangedintoD/A14【Case13】Discrepanciesindocuments115【Case14】Discrepanciesindocuments216【Case15】Discrepanciesindocuments317【Case16】Discrepanciesindocuments418【Case17】Discrepanciesindocuments519【Case18】Discrepanciesindocuments620【Case19】Disputeonpartialshipment23【Case20】Isitarightdecision?24【Case21】Theissuingbankrefusestomakepayment25【Case22】Damagecausedbyearlyshipment26【Case23】“Gum”or“GumRosin”?27【Case24】Aquantityclausewith“about”28【Case25】Trapclause130【Case26】Trapclause231【Case27】Whosefaultisit?33【Case28】Silenceamounttoacceptance?34【Case29】Apromisemadetobebroken【Case1】CIForNot?AnimportandexportcompanyHinChinasignedwithaBritishcompanyDacontractonCIFbasis,wherebycompanyHexportedsomelightindustrialproductstocompanyD.Thereweretwospecialclausesinthecontract:(1).“ThegoodsmustbeshippedtoaportinBritainfromShanghaiinOctober1996;therelevantL/CopenedbycompanyDshouldreachcompanyHbytheendofAugust;companyHmustguaranteethattheloadedvesselarrivesatthedestinationnotlaterthanDecember1.(2)ShouldtheloadedvesselarriveattheportofdestinationlaterthanDecember1,companyDisentitledtocancelthecontract.Ifthepaymenthasbeenmadeatthetime,itmustbereturnedtocompanyDexactlytheamount.”Afterthat,inthecourseofclearingupcontractfiles,acontroversyaroseincompanyHaboutthenatureofthisCIFcontract.SomepeopleheldtheopinionthatthecontractwasonCIFbasisinspiteofthetwoparticularterms,givingfollowingreasons:firstly,thecontractwassignedunderthetradetermofCIF,whichindicatedthenatureofthecontract;secondly,companyDmadesuchspecialrequirementsonlytoprotecttheirbenefits;thirdly,thecontractprovidedpaymentbyL/C,whichwasinaccordancewithCIFterm'scharacteristicofpaymentagainstdocuments.OthersbelievedthataccordingtoINCOTERMS2000,theseller'sdeliveryobligationsarefulfilledaslongasthesellerhascompletedshipmentofgoodsattheappointedpointandhandedovertothebuyerdocumentsstipulatedinthecontractandsothesellerisnotrequiredtoguaranteethearrivalofgoodsatthedestination.Therefore,thiscontractwasafalseCIFcontract,asitchangedthenatureofCIFtermbytakingphysicaldeliveryasaconditionoffulfillment.Thecontractmustberenegotiated.Finally,companyHreachedacommonperceptionandgotthetwospecialclausesamendedthroughnegotiationwithcompanyD.Thecontractwascarriedoutsmoothly.Analysis:AlthoughthecontractwasconcludedonCIFbasis,itwasnotagenuineCIFcontract.ThiscaseindicatesthesignificanceofCIFterm'ssphereofapplication.ThetwospecialclausesintheoriginalcontractnotonlycontradictedwiththenatureofCIFterm,butalsodisagreedwiththepracticesofinternationaljusticeandarbitration.First,theoriginalcontractnotonlysetalimittothedateofarrival,butalsostipulatedthatthebuyerwasentitledtocancelthecontractordemandbackthepaymentthathadalreadybeenmade.Evidently,therestrictivedateofarrivalservednotasthedateofpayment,butasaconditionofpayment.Therefore,legallythecontractwasnotagenuineCIFcontractasitmadephysicaldeliveryaconditionofpayment.Second,underCIFterms,theriskoflossofordamagetothegoodspassesfromthesellertothebuyerwhenthegoodshavepassedtheship'srailattheportofshipment.Acontractthatexpandsthebuyer'sriskfromtheportofshipmenttotheportofdestinationisnotaCIFcontract.Accordingtotheprovisionintheoriginalcontract,companyHwasobligatedtorefundthepaymentincaseofnaturalcalamitiesoraccidentsduringthecourseofdeliveringthegoods,whichevidencedthatthesellerassumedalltherisksduringthetransport.Third,underCIFterms,thebuyermustmakepaymentagainstdocumentsratherthanagainstthearrivalofthegoodsattheportofdestination,providedthatthesellerhasfulfilledhisdeliveryobligationsandpresentedtherequireddocuments.Aspertheoriginalcontract,whethercompanyHcouldreceivethepaymentforgoodsornotdependedonbuyer'sreceivingonschedule.AlthoughthesellermightreceivethepaymentbymeansofL/C,thepaymentwouldbetakenbackbythebuyerifthegoodscouldnotdulyarriveattheportofdestination.Besides,companyDcouldtakeadvantageofrelevantL/Cclausesthatareinaccordancewiththoseinthecontracttodenythesellerthepaymentforgoods.CompanyHcouldhardlymakeaclaimforhisrightsunderanormalCIFcontractsincethiscontractwastheone“innamebutnotinreality”.【Case2】CFR&ShippingNoticeAnimportandexportcompanyinChinasignedanexportcontractwithanimporterinMarseilles,FranceondrawnworktableclothwithanamountofUSD80,000,paymentbyD/Patsight.OnthemorningofJanuary8,1997,thegoodswereallloadedontothenamedvessel.Theexportsalespersoninchargeofthiscontractgotsobusythathedidnotremembertosendthebuyertheshippingadviceuntilthenextmorning.Unexpectedly,whentheFrenchimporterwenttothelocalinsurancecompanytoinsurethegoods,thelatterhadalreadylearnedthattheshipsufferedawreckonJanuary9andrefusedtounderwritethegoods.TheFrenchimporterimmediatelysentatelexsaying,“owingtoyourdelayedshippingadvice,weareunabletoinsurethegoodsbecausethevesselhasbeendestroyedinawreck.Thelossofgoodsshouldbeforyouraccount.Atthesametime,youshouldcompensateourprofitandexpenselosseswhichamounttoUSD8,000.”Soonalltheshippingdocumentssentthroughthecollectingbankwerereturnedtotheexportcompany,forthereasonthattheimporterrefusedtotakeupthedocuments.Beingaregularclientoftheexporter's,theFrenchimporterdidnotinsistonclaimingforcompensationaftertheexporterexplainedhisdifficultsituationandapologizedforthewholething.However,theexportershouldlearnhislessonfromthisexperience.Analysis:1.UnderCFRterms,alltherisks,dutiesandexpensesaftergoods'passingship'srailarenormallybornebythebuyer.However,Incoterms2000providesthat“thesellermustgivethebuyersufficientnoticeHeretheword“sufficient”referstoboth“sufficient”contentand“sufficient”time.Thelattermeansthesellermustgivetheshippingnoticeinatimelymannertoallowsufficienttimeforthebuyertoeffectinsuranceofthegoods.Thelaterthesellersendstheshippingnotice,thelesstimethebuyerhastoinsurethegoods.Inthiscase,thebuyer'sfailuretosendthe“sufficientnotice”ledtohislossofbothgoodsandmoney.Ontheotherhand,ifthesellerhadinformedthebuyerimmediatelyaftershippingthegoods,thebuyerwouldhaveinsuredthegoodsintimeatthelocalinsurancecompany.Inthatcase,theinsurancecompanywouldhaveassumeditsliabilityforcompensationeveniftheaccidenthadhappenedpriortothebuyer'seffectinginsuranceasboththebuyerandtheinsurancecompanywereignorantoftheaccident.Thus,itcanbeseenhowimportantitistosendtheshippingadvicetothebuyerintimeunderCFRterms.Thatiswhyshippingadviceisoftenreferredtoas“insurancenotice”intradepractices.2.WhenCFRtermsorFOBtermsareusedincombinationwithpaymentbycollection,thebuyermaycoverthegoodsagainst“seller'sinterestrisk”beforeexportingthegoodstocounteractthebuyer'sfailuretoeffectinsuranceorthebuyer'srefusaltoretirethedocuments.Hadthesellerinthiscasecoveredtheshipmentagainstthesaidrisk,thelosswouldhavebeensomewhatmitigated.【Case3】CFR&GoodsQualityAFrenchcompanyimportedabatchofwheatonCFRbasis.Thecontractprovidedthatthelandingqualityofthegoodsshouldbetakenasfinal.However,whenthegoodsarrivedatthedestination,theimportquarantinebureaudetainedthegoodsastheyhadfoundthatthegoodscontainedagreatdealofbacteriumforbiddentoenterthecountry.Unfortunately,thegoodswereconsumedbyafirewhileindetainment.Adisputebrokeoutbetweenthebuyerandtheseller.Analysis:UnderCFRterms,thebuyershouldbearalltherisksafterthegoodshavepassedtheship'srailandbeenloadedonboard.However,shouldthesellerbeheldresponsibleforanydefaultbeforethatpoint?Inthiscase,itwasthesellerwhoshouldassumetherisks.ThereasonisthatalthoughthiswasaCFRcontract,thesellerbreacheditbydeliveringthegoodswhichfailedtomeetthequalitystandardprovidedinthecontract.Thisfundamentaldefaulthascausedthedetainmentandthenthelossofthegoods.Therefore,whiletheriskshadbeentransferredtothebuyer,theseller'sdefaultreturnedtheriskstotheseller.Ofcourse,underCFRcontract,whentheseller'sdefaultisnotfundamental,thebuyershouldbearalltherisksforanylossofthegoodsattheportofdestination.Meanwhile,thesellershouldmakeduecompensationtothebuyerasperthecontractandrelevantlaws.【Case4】ThebuyerdelaysthesendingofthevesselunderFOB.CompanyAinChinasignedacontractonFOBbasistoexportwheattoCompanyBinAfrica.Itwascontractedthatshipmentshouldbemadeinfourlots.Theshippingclauseranasfollows:“thevesselnominatedbythebuyershouldreachtheportofshipmentwithineightdaysbeforethedateofshipment.Otherwise,anyoftheseller'slossordamagethusincurredshallbebornebythebuyer.”Thecontractalsospecified,“Thebuyermustgivetheselleranoticeofvesselnameandtheestimateddateofarrivalbytelecommunicationfivedaysbeforethevesselarrivesattheportofshipment.”Duringthecourseoffulfillment,thefirstthreelotswereshippedsmoothlyaccordingtothecontract.However,thebuyerwasslowtosendthevesselforthelastshipment.InreplytoCompanyA'srepeatedurges,companyBsaidthattheywereunabletobookshippingspacebecauseofshippingcompany'sbusyscheduleandaskedforpostponingdeliveryfortwomonths.CompanyArepliedasfollows:“accordingtothecontract,youareboundtosendthevesseltopickupthegoods.Incaseofanydifficultiesinthisaspect,wemayallowyoutodelaytheshipmentonconditionthatyoumakeacompensationwhichamountstoUSD200,000.”Finally,thebargainofcompensationwassettledatUSD150,000andcompanyBwasallowedtodelayvesselsendingfortwomonths.Analysis:UnderFOBterms,itisthebuyer'sobligationtoarrangefordeliveringthegoods.WithreferencetoINCOTERMS2000,“thebuyermustcontractathisownexpenseforthecarriageofthegoodsfromthenamedportofshipment.”Italsoprovidesthat“thebuyermustgivethesellersufficientnoticeofthevesselname,loadingpointandrequireddeliverytime”.Ifthebuyer'svesselfailstoarriveattheportofshipmentduly,orfailstoacceptthegoods,orstopsloadingaheadoftheschedulespecifiedinthecontract,alltherisksandlossofanddamagetothegoodsaretobebornebythebuyerasoftheappointeddatefordeliveringthegoodsortheexpirydateofthetimelimit.Itwaslearnedlaterthatduringtheimplementationofthelastshipment,theinternationalmarketpriceofwheatdroppeddrastically,whichgreatlyinfluencedthesalesofcompanyBwhothenattemptedtocancelthedeliveryofthelastshipmentbyhangingitup.However,companyAmadegooduseofINCOTERMSexplanationforFOBtermsandprotecteditsownintereststhroughpropermeans.【Case5】DamagecausedbyseriousqualitymistakeAnexportcompanyinChinaconcludedadealonediblecitricacid.Whiledeliveringthegoods,theymistookinediblecitricacidfortheediblekind.Notuntilseveraldaysafterthevessel'sdeparturedidtheydiscoverthemistake.Bynow,therelevantdocumentshadalreadybeensentbythenegotiatingbank.Toavoidsevereconsequences,theexportcompanytriedtowithholdthedocumentsatthepostoffice,while,ontheotherhand,iturgentlyinformedtheoceanshippingagencytoasktheagentinHongKongtointerceptthegoodswhentheshipcalledattheport.Thoughanaccidenthasbeenavoided,theexportcompanyhassufferedagreatloss.Analysis:Itcanbeclearlyseeninthiscasethattheexportcompanyhasseverelyviolatedthestipulationsofrelevantinternationalconventions.CISGindicatesthatthesellermustsupplythegoodsofcontractedquality;otherwise,thebuyerisentitledtoclaimcompensationortorejectthegoodsandcancelthecontract.Itisaveryseriousfaultfortheexportcompanytohavemistakeninediblecitricacidfortheediblekind.Ifthemistakehadremainedundiscovered,andtheinediblecitricacidhadbeenmisusedinfood,seriousconsequenceswouldhaveoccurred.Whilefoundoutearly,themistakehascausedgreattroublesinhandlingthematterandaconsequentlosstherefrom.Therearetwolessonstobedrawnfromthecase:a.Asoundmanagementsystemshouldbeestablished.Follow-upsarenecessarytoensurethatthegoodsaremanufacturedinaccordancewiththeorders.b.Thepersonnelinchargeshoulddevelopstrongsenseofresponsibility.Ifthepersonnelinchargehadmarked“edible”or“forindustrialuse”,thesaidaccidentcouldhavebeenavoided.【Case6】FraudbyqualityclauseInOctober1997,aChineseenterprisesignedasalescontractwithaHongKongtradingcompany.Thecontractprescribedthatthebuyershouldorderfromtheseller5000metrictonsofcastironwellcoveronFOBbasisatunitpriceUSD610/MT.ThetotalamountreachedUSD3,050,000.Itwasalsoprovidedinthecontractthatthegoodsshouldbeshippedbimonthlyintenequallots,500metrictonseachlot.Thegoodsmustbemanufacturedaccordingtothesampleprovidedbythebuyerandmustgothroughthebuyer'sexaminationbeforeacceptance.Accordingtothequalityclause,thesurfaceofthecastingshouldbesmooth,andtheremustnotbeanycasingdefectssuchascracks,airholes,sandholes,shrinkageholes,andslaginclusionsetc.Thecontractalsostipulated“thatthesellermustpayasumofcautionmoneyequalto10%ofthepaymentofthefirstdelivery;thesellermaytakebackthecautionmoneywithin5daysafterthefirstdeliveryof500tonsofgoodshavebeenfoundtomeetthequalitystandard;thesellermustaskthebuyertocometotheplaceoforigintosamplethegoodsandsignaqualityconfirmationdocument;thebuyerhastherighttorejectthegoodsiftheydonotmeetthequalityrequirement;withoutmutualagreement,neitherpartyshouldterminatethecontractunilaterally,otherwisealltheeconomiclossesthusincurredwillbesustainedbythepartywhoterminatesthecontract.”ThesellerremittedthecautionmoneyofRMB250,000tothebuyerimmediatelyaftersigningthesalescontract,andputinalotofworkandmoneytotrial-producetheproductasperthebuyer'spattern.Afterproducingsomesamples,thesellertelexedthebuyertoinspectthesamplesaspertheagreementsothatthesellermaystartthemassproductiononcethesampleswererecognized.However,thebuyeratfirstexcusedhimselffromcomingwithabusyschedule,andthenproposedthatthebuyeraskthelocalcommodityinspectionofficetoconducttheinspectioninsteadoftheseller.Inordertoobtainthequalityconfirmationforthetimelydeliveryofthegoods,thesellerhadtoaccepttheproposal.Whenthequalityinspectorscameandcheckedthecontractandthecomplementaryagreement,theyfoundthattheword“smooth”appearinginthefirstclauseofqualitywasavagueconceptwithoutanyspecificcriteria,andthatthehiddendangerofthesecondclausewasevengreater.Theinspectorsimmediatelyrealizedthatthiswasprobablyafraudbymeansofqualityclauses.Havingsealedupthesampleforkeeping,theinspectorsaskedthesellertourgethebuyertocomeroundforinspectionasprovidedinthecontract,andtoldthesellernottoproduceonalargescalebeforeobtainingthequalityconfirmation.However,thebuyerdidnotcome,butclaimedinthereplythattheyweregoingtosuethebuyerbecausethebuyerhadnotproducedtherequiredproductswithinthetimelimitprovidedinthecontractandthusconstitutedadefault.NotuntilthendidthesellercompletelywakeuptotherealitythattheHongKongCompanyhadnotonlyswindledthecautionmoneybutalsomadeafalsecountercharge.LateritwasevidencedthattheHongKongCompanyhaddefraudedseveralothertradingcompaniesonChinesemainland.Withthehelpoftheinspectionoffice,thesellerstoppedtheproductiontoavoidfurtherloss.However,thecautionmoneycouldnotberecovered.Analysis:Thisisatypicalcaseofdefraudinwhichthebuyertookadvantageoftheevadablecontract.Theso-calledevadablecontractmeansthatoneofthetwopartiestrickstheotherpartyintoadefaultbysigningacontract,whichbearsoneormoreclausesthatareimpossiblefortheotherpartytomeet.Thiskindofcontracthasthefollowingcharacteristics:(1)thereisalwaysanattractivepriceclauseservingasthe“bait”;(2)thereareimpracticableorambiguoustechnicalstandardsservingasthe“trap”;(3)thereisalwaysacautionmoneyclauseorapenaltyclause;(4)thetargetisalwaysthepoorlymanagedandinexperiencedsmalltradingcompanieswhoareeagerforinstantprofit.Herearesomecountermeasures:Becautiousaboutyourtradingpartner.Investigationshouldbemadeonthecreditabilityofthetradingpartner.Makesurethatqualityclauseisreasonable.Qualityclausemattersbecauseitprovidestheonlybasisbywhichboththesellerandthebuyerevaluatethegoods.Therefore,whetherthesellercanfulfillthecontractornotdependsonwhetherareasonablequalityclausecanbereachedornot.Anambiguousqualityclausewithoutanyspecificcriteriaorrangeisunacceptable.Forthoseproductsthatarehardtogetawayfrompotentialdefects,methodslikespecifications,grades,qualitytolerancecanbeappliedtodefinequality.Otherwise,thesellermaygivethebuyerahandleandfindhimselfinapassiveposition.Askthedepartmentsconcernedtocheckthecontract.InChina,mostdefraudcasesareattributabletotheloopholesincontracts.Therefore,itisnecessaryfortheforeigntradecompaniestoconsultcertaindepartmentsabouttechnicalproblemsbeforesigningthecontractand,aftersigningthecontract,askorganizationssuchascommodityinspectionbureau,CCPITandlawconsultationservicetolookthroughthecontractsoastoreviseorterminatethecontractwhennecessary.Donoteasilyacceptcautionmoneyclauseorpenaltyclauseandthelike.Theseclausesareaddedtothecontractonlywhenthedealistrulysubstantialtoavoidanydamagetotheotherparty.Trytoconvertthe“buyer'ssample”into“countersample”.【Case7】ThebuyerrefusestotakedeliverybecauseofshortageAnexportcompanyinChinasignedafruitexportcontractwithaHungarianfirm,paymenttobemadeupontheacceptanceinspectionafterthearrivalofthegoods.However,thegoodsarrivedwerefoundtobe10%shortintotalweight;theindividualweightwasalsolessthanthatstipulatedinthecontract.TheHungarianfirmneithermadepaymentnortookthedelivery.Thefruitsallrotaway.TheHungary'scustomchargedtheexportcompanyUSD50,000forthestorageanddisposalofthegoods.Theexportcompanygotintoahobble.Analysis:Quantityofgoodsisoneoftheindispensabletermsofinternationalsalescontractofgoods.Accordingtothelawsofcertaincountries,thequantityofthegoodsdeliveredbythesellermustagreewiththestipulationofthecontract,otherwisethebuyerhastherighttoclaimforcompensationorevenrejectthegoods.Inthiscase,althoughtheexportcompanywasapparentlyinapassiveposition,itwaspossibletoretrievethelossbyarguingonjustgrounds.First,theexportcompanyshouldinvestigatewhethertheshortageofweightwascausedbynormallossduringtransportationorbyitsowndefault.Iftheexportcompanywasinbreachofthecontract,itshouldbeidentifiedwhetherthebreachwasfundamentalornot.Shouldthebreachwasnotfundamental,theHungarianfirmhadnorighttorejectthegoodsandrefusetomakepaymentbutcouldonlydemandpricereductionorcompensationfortheloss.Shouldthebreachwasfundamental,theHungarianfirmmightrejectthegoods,butitshouldtakegoodcareofthegoods,orresellthefreshgoodsonbehalfofthesellertoreducethelosstotheminimum.CISGArticle86specifiesclearly“IfthebuyerhasreceivedthegoodsandintendstoexerciseanyrightunderthecontractorthisConventiontorejectthem,hemusttakesuchstepstopreservethemasarereasonableinthecircumstances.Heisentitledtoretainthemuntilhehasbeenreimbursedhisreasonableexpensesbytheseller.”TheHungarianfirmfailedtofulfilltheobligationtopreservethegoodsandabatetheloss.Therefore,theexportcompanyshouldnegotiatewiththeHungarianfirmaboutthedamageofthegoodsandretrievethelossasmuchaspossible.【Case8】DamagecausedbyimproperpackingAChinesecompanyimportedsomeflammableliquidchemicalrawmaterialfromaFrenchcompany.Whenthegoodsarrivedatthedestination,itwasfoundthattherewasaslightleakagecausedbythedefectinafewpackages.However,theChinesecompanyfailedtotakeanymeasurestosavethelossandpreventthedamagefromexpanding.Asaresult,theleakageworsenedafterthewarehousingofthegoodsandledtoaself-ignitedfire.Afterwards,theChinesecompanyclaimedagainsttheFrenchcompanyforfullcompensationofthetotalloss,butwasrefused.Analysis:In5></a><Bstyle='color:white;background-color:#880000'>viewofthesituationinthiscase,thebuyercouldnotmakeaclaimforthetotalloss.Whilereceivingthegoods,thebuyerhadalreadytakenpossessionofthegoods.Besides,withtheawarenessoftheleakageandtheknowledgeaboutthedangeroftheinflammabilityofthegoods,thebuyershouldhavetakenreasonableprecautionstopreventtheexpansionofthedamage.Underthesecircumstances,itwasthebuyer'sresponsibilitiestoprotectthegoodsandpreventthedamagefromexpanding.Sincethegoods'self-ignitionhadresultedfromthebuyer'sfailuretofulfillsuchresponsibilities,thesellershouldnotanswerfortheexpansionofthedamage.AsperCISGArticle86(1),thebuyerwasonlyentitledtoclaimthecompensationforthedamagecausedbytheslightleakageinducedbythedeficiencyofthefewpackages,ratherthanclaimthecompensationforthedamageexpandedbecauseofthebuyer'sfailuretotakeprecautions.Therefore,theFrenchcompanywasjustifiedinturningdowntheclaimagainsttotallosslodgedbytheChinesecompany.【Case9】MissingaddressindocumentarycollectionAnagriculturalproductsimportandexportcompany(companyA)inChinasoldabatchofHempseedsworthUSD985,000.Itwaswritteninthecontractthat“paymentbytheseller'sdraft20daysaftersighttobeacceptedbythebuyeruponpresentation.Documentsaretobedeliveredtothebuyeragainstacceptance.Paymentistobemadeonthedateofmaturity.”CompanyAshippedthegoodsaccordingtothecontractontimeandpresentedthedocumentsonMarch15toitsremittingbankforcollection.TheremittingbankappointedBankD.K.asthecollectingbankandmailedthedocumentstoit.OnApril25,amessagewasreceivedfromcompanyB,thebuyer:“RexxxxxtonsofHempseedsunderContractNo.xxxxx,asperyourshippingnoticeonMarch14,wehavecontactedtheshippingagency.Thegoodshavearrivedforalongtime,butpresentlywestillhavenotreceivedthedocumentscoveringthegoods.Pleasecheckwithyourbankaboutit.”CompanyArepliedonApril28:“ThankyouforyourfaxofApril25.RexxxxxtonsofHempseedsunderContractNo.xxxxx,wehavecheckedandherebyconfirmthatweentrustedthehandlingofD/A20daystoBankConMarch15.BankCsentthedocumentstoyouonMarch16.Pleasecheck.”OnApril30,companyBsentanothermessage:“ThankyouforyourfaxofApril28.WehaveinquiredourcorrespondentbankWrepeatedlybutfoundnothingrelatedtothiscollection.PleasefinditoutwiththecollectingbankD.K.throughyourremittingbank.Lookforwardtoyourreply.”Uponreceivingthemessage,companyAcontactedtheremittingbankwhoatthesametimereceivedamessagefromthecollectingbankD.K.:“WeacknowledgedocumentsNo.xxxxxandthecollectioninstruction.Becausethedrawee'saddressonthedocumentsandthecollectionorderisnotindetail(onlycontainsthenameofthecity,noroadnameandhousenumber),wehavetriedhardtofinditoutbutinvain.Pleasetellusimmediatelywhattodo.”Checkingwiththefilecopies,companyAfoundthatwhatthecollectingbanksaidwasindeedthecase.Thepersonwhodealtwiththisbusinessmissedoutthedrawee'saddresswhenfillingoutrelevantinstructionstothedocumentationdepartment.CompanyAalsorealizedthatitshouldhavechosenBankW,thecorrespondentbankofthepayer,asthecollectingbank.Infact,ascompanyAdidnotappointcollectingbank,theremittingbankchoseBankD.K.,whichhadnobusinessrelationswiththepayer,todothejob.Afterstudy,theremittingbankimmediatelysentthedetailedaddressofthepayertoBankD.K.sothatBankD.K.couldmakepresentmentforacceptance.However,aprotestnotewasreceivedfromthecollectingbank.Becauseofthedelayeddocuments,thebuyercouldnotpickupthegoodsintime.Asaresult,thegoodswerefirstdamagedbyrainandthenwerestoredinthecustomswarehousewithhighexpenses.Therefore,thebuyerrefusedtomakeacceptance.CompanyAnegotiatedwiththebuyerbutcouldnotreachagreement.Finally,companyAhadtocommitthegoodstoaninstitutionstationedinthebuyer'scountryfordisposalandsustainedabigloss.Analysis:InaccordancewithURC522Article4.b.iii,acollectinginstructionshouldinclude“detailsofthedraweeincludingfullname,postaladdress,orthedomicileatwhichpresentationistobemadeandifapplicabletelex,telephoneandfacsimilenumbers.”ItisalsoprovidedinArticle4.cthat“collectioninstructionsshouldbearthecompleteaddressofthedraweeorofthedomicileatwhichthepresentationistobemade.Iftheaddressisincompleteorincorrect,thecollectingbankmay,withoutanyliabilityandresponsibilityonitsparts,endeavortoascertaintheproperaddress.Thecollectingbankwillnotbeliableorresponsibleforanyensuringdelayasaresultofanincomplete/incorrectaddressbeingprovided.”Obviously,inthiscase,thecollectingbankwasnotresponsibleforthelossincurredbecausecompanyAdidnotprovidedetailedaddressofthedraweeonthecollectioninstruction.【Case10】RefusalofpaymentunderD/PAnagriculturalproductsimportandexportcompany(companyA)inChinaexportedabatchoffrozenprawnstocompanyB.Thecontractprovidedthat“paymentbydraftdrawnonbuyerpayableatsight,documentsagainstpayment.”CompanyAfollowedthestipulationofthecontractandshippedthegoodsonSeptember15.InJulyofthatyear,thebuyersentcompanyAanoticeofrelocation.Duetonegligence,thepersonwhopreparedthedocumentsappliedtheoldaddresstothe“notifiedparty”onthebillofladingandthecollectioninstruction.Meanwhile,consideringsafetyofpayment,companyAmadeoutthebilloflading“toorderofTheCommercialBank”sothatthetitleofthegoodswouldbeheldbythebank.OnSeptember18,theremittingbanksentthedocumentsabroad.UponthereceiptofthedocumentsonSeptember28,theCommercialBanksentanoticetothedraweeaccordingtothecollectioninstruction.However,thenoticewasreturnedonOctober10bythepostofficeforreasonof“unknownaddress”.Forthesamereason,thecarrierfailedtogetintouchwiththenotifiedparty,soitnotifiedtheconsigneeindicatedonthebilloflading,theCommercialBankinstead.AstheCommercialBankmadenoresponse,thecarrierhadtounloadandstorethegoodsinthewarehouseforthetimebeing.OnOctober11,theCommercialBanknotifiedtheremittingbankofthesituationthatthedraweecouldnotbefound.OnOctober13,companyAprovidedthelatestaddressofthedraweetotheremittingbankthatimmediatelysentacorrectedcollectioninstructiontotheCommercialBankandaskedthelattertopresentthedocumentstothedraweeassoonaspossible.NotuntilOctober20didtheCommercialBankpresentthedraftandthedocumentstothedrawee,companyB.However,thebuyerrefusedtotakethedocumentsandmakepayment,givingthefollowingreason:becauseofdelayeddelivery,thegoodshadbeenunloadedanddepositedintothewarehousetheinappropriatetemperatureofwhichcausedpartofthegoodstomelt.Intheend,companyAhadtoentrustthegoodstoitsotherclientsattheportofdestinationtosellthegoodsatamuchlowerpriceandlostalotofmoney.Analysis:Asaresultofitsownfault,companyAfailedtoprovidethebuyer'snewaddresstotheremittingbankintime,makingthecollectingbankunabletoreachthedraweeandthecarrierunabletofindthenotifiedparty,thusthegoodscouldnotbedeliveredtothebuyerintimeandbegantomelt.Companyshouldshoulderthefullresponsibilityforthisproblem.BecauseaccordingtoURC522Article4.C.ii.“Thecollectingbankwillnotbeliableorresponsibleforanyensuingdelayasaresultofanincomplete/incorrectaddressbeingprovided.”Furthermore,itwasimproperforcompanyAtomakeoutthebillofladingtoorderofthecollectingbank.AccordingtoURC522Article10.a,“Goodsshouldnotbedispatcheddirectlytotheaddressofabankorconsignedtoortotheorderofabankwithoutprioragreementonthepartofthatbank.Nevertheless,intheeventthatgoodsaredispatcheddirectlytotheaddressofabankorconsignedtoortotheorderofabankforreleasetoadraweeagainstpaymentoracceptanceoruponothertermsandconditionswithoutprioragreementonthepartofthegoods,whichremainattheriskandresponsibilityofthepartydispatchingthegoods.”Therefore,whenthecarriercontactedtheCommercialBankforpickingupofthegoods,thelatterturneditsbackonit.Consequently,thecarrierstoredthegoodsinthewarehousewherethegoodsweredeteriorated.Asaformofcollection,D/PispreferredbyimportersforitsadvantagessuchasthesavingofL/Cestablishmentexpensesandguaranteedeposit,andtheaccelerationofcashflow.Asfarasexportersareconcerned,D/PissaferthanD/Aasthetitletothegoodsistransferredonlywhentheimporterhasmadethepayment,otherwisethetitleremainsinthehandoftheexporter.However,riskexistswheretheimporterhasabadcreditstandingandrefusestotakethedocumentsandmakethepayment.Therefore,itisimportantfortheimportertoinvestigatethecreditstatusofthebuyerwhenapplyingD/P.【Case11】AdisputecausedbyD/AOnDecember26,companyAinFujianProvinceofChinasignedacontractwithcompanyBinHongKongcoveringtheassemblageof3,000setsofelec