法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库>>全文
论UCP500下开证行的有效拒付/贾浩(5)

3、 表明单据已代为保管听候处理,或已退给交单人(STATE IT IS HOLDING THE DOCUMENTS AT THE DISPOSAL OF ,OR IS RETUNING THEM TO THE PRESENTER)
在拒付通知中,并不是仅仅出现了“表明单据已代为保管听候处理”这样的类似文字就符合了UCP500第十四条(D)(II)款的要求,而是还要能从整个拒付通知中表达出这样的意思,否则,仍不能构成有效拒付。

Credit Industriel et Commercial v. China Merchants Bank[2002] EWHC 973 (Q.B. Comm. 2002) [England]案便是说明这一要点的典型案例。该案中开证行SWIFT发出如下拒付通知:
“Please be advised that the following discrepancies found:
- Beneficiary’s draft not made in English
- Irregular L/C No shown on P/L
- Original of P/L Cert of Quantity and Cert of Quality not submitted
- Under invoice No 1062 percentage of grade shown on invoice not complied with P/L
We refuse the documents according to Art 14 UCP no 500. Should the disc being accepted by the Applicant, we shall release the docs to them without further notice to you unless yr instructions to the contrary received prior to our payment. Documents held at yr risk for yr disposal.”
议付行抗辩认为此通知不是一个符合UCP500第十四条的拒付通知。法院也认同此观点,理由是由通知中的“Should the disc being accepted by the Applicant, we shall release the docs to them without further notice to you unless yr instructions to the contrary received prior to our payment.”会推导出在申请人接受不符点的情况下,单据将会放给申请人,而不能退给议付行或代为保管听候处理,构成了不正当占有议付行单据的行为(CONVERSION)。因而,法院判定适用“PRECLUSION”原则,该拒付无效。另外,笔者认为上述语句还使开证行自动放弃了自行决断是否拒付的权利,因为开证行声称“SHOULD THE DISC BEING ACCEPTED BY THE APPLICANT,WE SHALL RELEASE THE DOCUS TO THEM…”即只要申请人接受不符点,我行就放单付款,如果万一申请人在同意接受不符点后因破产而不能偿付开证行,且受益人持有申请人已接受不符点的证据(如传真),那么开证行此时就很难再行使其自行决断权而拒绝付款了。


总共14页     [1]   [2]   [3]   [4]   5   [6]   [7]   [8]   [9]   [10]   [11]   [12]   [13]   [14]  
上一页     下一页    

声明:本论文由《法律图书馆》网站收藏,
仅供学术研究参考使用,
版权为原作者所有,未经作者同意,不得转载。
法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库