内容发布更新时间 : 2024/12/23 18:49:14星期一 下面是文章的全部内容请认真阅读。
析:No, 卖方没有违反信用证“不允许装船” 的规定。答题切入点：对转船的定义和相关规定的理解。UCP600 Article 31, “…transportation documents, which appear on their face to indicate that shipment commencing on the same means of conveyance and for the same journey, provided they indicate the same destination, will not be regarded as covering a partial shipment, even if they indicate different dates of shipment or different ports of loading, places of taking in charge or dispatch.”
2. Dee co. signed a large export contract stipulating, “shipment will be made during August of 2008”. But due to the problems with the vessel, the shipment was not made until September 13. Upon Dee?s request, the carrier ante-dated the B/L to August 31. (1) What could be the consequence of ante-dating?
(2) What would be the right thing to do in case of a possible shipment delay?
析:(1)倒签提单是一种严重的合谋欺诈行为，托运人和承运人都可能被追究法律责任，如使收货人蒙受损失，还会被追讨赔偿。Changing the date of shipment on B/L is a forgery. Both the seller and carrier are liable. In the worst case, the vessel and goods could be impounded. Because
according to UCP 600, the B/L shall be presented within 21 days after issuance, unless otherwise stipulated in the credit.
(2)与买方磋商，寻求双方都能接受的解决办法。1）延期信用证的有效期和船期，2）买方同意向银行（开证行）和卖方开出保函，保证接受签发日期迟于信用证规定日期的提单。Honesty is the best policy. The seller should contact the buyer immediately about remedy measures. Even if the buyer does not cooperate, the penalty for the shipment delay is not likely to be largely.
3. A Chinese exporter signed a CIF contract with a foreign importer. Payment was to be made by irrevocable sight L/C. ……Finally the exporter accepted the claim and made compensation as requested, as he thought that he, as the person booking the vessel, should be liable for the carrier?s unauthorized transshipment. (1) Do you think the settlement of this case appropriate? (2) Who should bear the loss? Why?
(3) Who should be liable for the damage? Why? (4) What should the seller do?
析:本题的解题要点：a. 信用证规定不允许转船； b. 卖方与承运人签订的运输合同是要求直达船运输的，有直达提单为证； c. 承运人中途卸货转船是其单方面的违约行为。 （1）答案：No。 卖方不应赔偿买方的损失。
答题切入点： a. CIF的性质和卖方的责任 b. 中途卸货转船的责任人。 （2）答案：买方自己而不应由卖方承担损失。 答题切入点：贸易术语CIF风险的转移。 （3）答案：承运人应对货损负责。
答题切入点：a. Direct B/L的含义 b. 造成货损的直接原因及其责任方。 （4）答案：卖方可建议并协助买方直接向承运人交涉并索赔。
答题切入点：卖方不是货损的责任人。 Chapter 6
1. X Company signed a CIF contract to export candies. The cargo was insured for “all risks”. Due to the long voyage, candies absorbed sweating in the ship?s hold, and thus softened and degraded. Was the insurance company liable for the damage? Why or why not?
析:NO. “due to … Degraded”,这说明candies变软的原因在于长时间海上运输，吸收了船舱的热气所致。保险公司不应给予赔偿的原因有三：a. 在货物运输保险中没有”长时间运输”这一风险。b. Candy变软是由于其本身的货物特性决定的，糖果即使在常温下摆放一段时间都会变软，因此可认为是糖果的内在瑕疵(inherent vice)所导致的。c.虽然一般附加险中包含了”heating and sweating”这一险种，但此险种是指由于某种意外的原因（如船上的制冷设备坏了）导致船舱内温度、湿度突然变化， 造成货物品质变化的情况下，本案例不属于此情况。This is inherent vice, is exclusions of the insurance company. Heating and Sweating Risk: Under this coverage is the risk of loss of or damage to the goods by sweating and heating as a result of the sudden change of temperature or the ventilation on the vessel being out of order. All Risks shall in no case be deemed to extend to cover loss, damage or expense caused by heating and sweating.
2. A cargo was insured for “all risks”. On a night voyage, the ship had to sail without lights due to air attacks. As a result, it collided with another ship and sank. Was the loss covered by the insurance policy? Why or why not?
析:YES. 货物损失的是船只相撞造成的，失事船只只在夜间熄灯航线是为了躲避空袭，但空袭对船只并没有造成事实上的损失，因此不能在近因原则框架内分析。本批货物只投保了All Risks, 其中包括了船只相撞(collision)这种风险，因此，保险公司应该赔付。This belongs to fortuitous accident, so it belongs to FPA. All Risks means that the insurer shall undertake the liabilities under FPA and WPA.
3. An exporter signed an FOB contract with a French company and a CIF contract with a British Company. Both cargoes were insured for marine cargo insurance. But in transit from the exporter?s factory to the port of shipment, the goods were damaged. Under each deal, who should obtain insurance? Who should take the loss?
析:1）FOB下，进口商法国公司投保，CIF下出口商投保。因为FOB下，风险在船舷转移，买方承担主要航程的风险，因此通常是买方去投保，但在CIF下，卖方有购买保险的责任，卖方是投保人。2）FOB下，出口商承担损失，CIF下出口商承担损失，但如果风险在承保范围内，出口商可以向保险公司索赔。两种术语下，风险转移都是在船舷，受损发生在之前，卖方是受损方，因此卖方提起索赔，但索赔要满足三个条件：如果投保人或受益人投了保，且风险在承保范围内，又对受损货物有可保利益the Interest Principle，同时又能满足仓至仓条款W/W Clause，索赔人就可以向保险公司索赔。
4. On a voyage the cargo ship had an accidental fire. To save the ship, the captain ordered to have water poured into the compartment. The fire was put out. 7. For party X,…10% of USD 0.5 million cargo. 8. For party Y,…20% of USD 1 million cargo. 9. For the carrier,…10% of USD 50 million ship 10. Extra wages for the seamen totaled USD50 000. Based on the information above, indicate 1) Which is PA? 2) Which is GA?
3) What is the GA contribution for each party? 析:1) party X, Carrier. 2) party Y, Extra wages. 3) Total GA loss=1*20%+0.05=0.25 million
Total GA contributory value=1+0.5*90%+ 50*90%=46.45 million GA percentage=(0.25/46.45)*100%=0.54%
GA contributory by party X=0.5*90%*0.54%=USD 2430 GA contributory by party Y=1 000 000*0.54%=USD 5400 GA contributory by carrier=50*90%*0.54%=USD 243 000
11. An importer signed an FOB contract with an Australian company, importing a batch of woolen blanket.…WPA and War Risks…4 cm in diameter…Comment on this case and work out the solution.
析:1）卖方的损失？本案例中卖方已经按合同和术语要求完成了交货，货物受损是在风险转移之后，因此损失应该有买方负责。2）保险公司负责理赔？案例中”the exporter suggested the importer lodge a claim against the insurer for compensation”一说不正确。进口商虽然投保了WPA和战争险，但损失是由于集装箱的问题造成的，属于第三方的责任，买方没有理由向保险公司索赔。3）谁是第三责任方？货物受损是由于承运人提供的集装箱出问题而导致的，因此承运人应该负担责任，买方应该向承运人索赔。 Chapter 7
6. On September 1, X Company signed a contract to export goods to the US. On September 30, City Bank sent an irrevocable L/C with an amount of USD30,000. The L/C stipulated shipment during October, and Bank of Tokyo to be the reimbursing bank. On October 2, Bank of China advised X of the L/C. But ten days later, X learnt that the import was near bankruptcy. How should X deal with the situation?
析: a案例中X公司收到的是一份不可撤销的信用证（an irrevocable L／C），说明X 公司在满足信用证所列条件的情况下，可以直接从开证行或开证行指定银行获得货款，而 不需考虑进口商的状况。
b在这种情况下，X 公司在做决策时，需要考虑的一是自身完 成信用证所列条件的能力，二是与进口商的合作问题。
答题切入点：a信用证支付情况下各方的关系；b X 公司可选择的做法及注意事项。
7. F, a state-owned enterprise, signed a contract to import 1000 M/T of galvanized steel sheets from a H.K. company. On March 1, a Shanghai bank issued the L/C for USD200,000. On March 24,…On March 25…On March 26…On March 30…The issuing bank was immediately notified of the fraud,…
In April 5,…On April 14, the issuing bank requested the HK bank to exercise the right of recourse.(a) Would there be any problem with the recourse? (b) What were the lessons? 析:A.在3月30日进口方发现货不对板，通知开证行时开证行“could not refuse to take up the document”，这里说明开证行尽管知道货不对板，但如果它认为议付行所提交的单证与信用证相符，开证行必须依照信用证规定的义务行事，即对议付行进行偿付。因为，在信用证的运作下，各方只凭单据操作，而不涉及实际的货物。 B.4月5日进口商发现单据有不符点，可以想象的结果就是进口商拒绝赎单付款。 此时开证行已向议付行支付了货款，而又遭到进口商以正当理由拒绝赎单付款，它是遭受损失的一方，因此会向议付行提出行使追索权。 C 但根据UCP600 开证行进行的议付是“无追索权的议付”。 (a)答案：Yes。
答题切入点：UCP600 对开证行责任的规定。
(b)答题切入点：在分析所吸取教训的时候，要分步进行。 a首先要分析在这起事件中哪几方遭受损
失；b然后进一步说明各方遭受损失的原因；c最后提出预防类似情况 出现的方法。
8. FF Company signed a contract to export goods to AA company in Africa. In September FF was notified of the L/C, but the money of account was different from that required by the sales contract.…The next day, AA cabled back, “L/C amended.”…At this time, AA requested DP-TR. Should FF accept it? Is there any lesson to be learnt from this case?
析:案例中AA 公司要求的DP-TR 是指付款交单凭信托收据接单的做法。 这种支付方式是对过去的远期付款交单的一种折中办法。 过去有贸易商采用远期付款交单，但这种方法并不能够给进口商提供所需的融资时间，因为在等待远期汇票到期的这段时间，进口商不能把单据从银行拿出来，以便销售，回笼资金。 DP-TR 是托收的委托人或代收行允许进口商使用一张信托收据来把提单等单据借出去，进行销售并在汇票到期日把货款还上。 如果允许使用DP-TR，则委托人或代收行要承担进口商借单不还款的风险。
答题切入点：a 解释DP-TR 的应用特点；b 对AA 的过往行为进行判断，对其要求DP-TR 的目的进行分析；c FF 如果同意采用DP-TR 可能出现的后果；d FF 是受损一方，分析其在不同阶段所犯的错误及预防错误的方法。
9. A Chinese bank issued standby L/Cs totaling millions of US dollars, in favor of an US company. These were irrevocable, transferable standby L/Cs valid for one year.…”It has no obligation to repay principal and interest, and bears no responsibility, economic or legal, for the funds.” Was there any risk for the bank?
析:A 本案例中各方的关系可能是：某中国公司要某美国公司投资某项目，作为完成项目的担保，向银行申请开出一份备用信用证，受益方是美国公司。 中国公司在申请信用证的时候可能游说银行，使其相信这只是帮助吸引外资的一个文件，该公司会承担完成项目的责任，而美国公司则负责出资，所以银行不会承担任何风险。 中方银行在对备用信用证没有了解的情况下同意该操作。 B 备用信用证尽管是一种特殊的信用证，它为申请人提供担保，在申请人未能完成所规定义务的情况下向受益人支付约定的款项；但它的本质还是一份信用证，即在符合条件的情况下开证行对受益人承诺付款义务。 C 案例中的开证行对备用信用证了解不透，误解了它所应承担的责任，因此也忽略了它可能承担的风险：当中国公司不能履行其义务时，开证行是要向美国公司支付相应款项的。
答案：Yes。 答题切入点：a备用信用证的特点；b信用证使用中开证行的义务；c案例中如果申请人不能履行义务，开证行的责任。