인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2009.6
- 수록면
- 333 - 355 (23page)
- DOI
- 10.18284/jss.2009.06.28.1.333
이용수
초록· 키워드
This paper aims at analysing the basic principles for the examination between submitted documents and terms and conditions of the credit would be determined under UCP 600 through in depth comparison with relevant articles of UCP 500. Article 14 does in the UCP 600 what the old Article 13 in the UCP 500. It establishes the basic responsibility of the banks to examine documents tendered under letters of credit. This study finds that the article 14 in UCP 600 with respect to the provision of examination of the presented documents seem to provide better simplicity and clarity to the banks.
We shall be concentrating here on three aspects of this duty which have in some way been altered by the new rules. First, the basic duty to examine the documents "appear on their face". Two points need to be made about this newly drafted part of Article 14(a). ① The phrase "with reasonable care", which was used in the old Article 13(a) of the UCP 500, has been omitted. ② The duty is to examine "whether or not the the documents appear on their face" to comply. There was much discussion during the revision process whether the words "on their face"added anything of substance to the word "appear" and although there was clear agreement that they did not, there was no agreement as to whether the words "on their face"should be deleted. Secondly, the time allowed to the banks to examine the documents. The old Article 13(b) of the UCP 500 gave each bank involved in the credit a "reasonable time" was deleted and the maximum number of banking days available for banks to examine documents had been limited to five banking days from seven banking days following the day of presentation. The removal of "reasonable time", not to exceed seven banking days" for checking documents and its replacement by five banking days should shorten the process. Thirdly, linkage/consistency between the documents tendered-Article 14(d) and (e) in UCP 600. It caused great debate during the revision process. The question is the degree to which inconsistencies between the documents tendered was to contitute a discrepancy preventing payment. This came to be known in the revision process as the "linkage" issue.+
상세정보 수정요청해당 페이지 내 제목·저자·목차·페이지We shall be concentrating here on three aspects of this duty which have in some way been altered by the new rules. First, the basic duty to examine the documents "appear on their face". Two points need to be made about this newly drafted part of Article 14(a). ① The phrase "with reasonable care", which was used in the old Article 13(a) of the UCP 500, has been omitted. ② The duty is to examine "whether or not the the documents appear on their face" to comply. There was much discussion during the revision process whether the words "on their face"added anything of substance to the word "appear" and although there was clear agreement that they did not, there was no agreement as to whether the words "on their face"should be deleted. Secondly, the time allowed to the banks to examine the documents. The old Article 13(b) of the UCP 500 gave each bank involved in the credit a "reasonable time" was deleted and the maximum number of banking days available for banks to examine documents had been limited to five banking days from seven banking days following the day of presentation. The removal of "reasonable time", not to exceed seven banking days" for checking documents and its replacement by five banking days should shorten the process. Thirdly, linkage/consistency between the documents tendered-Article 14(d) and (e) in UCP 600. It caused great debate during the revision process. The question is the degree to which inconsistencies between the documents tendered was to contitute a discrepancy preventing payment. This came to be known in the revision process as the "linkage" issue.+
정보가 잘못된 경우 알려주세요!
목차
- Ⅰ. 서론
- Ⅱ. UCP 500과 UCP 600 서류심사 규정
- Ⅲ. 서류심사에 관한 판례분석
- Ⅳ. 결론
- 참고문헌
- 〈Abstract〉
참고문헌
참고문헌 신청최근 본 자료
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-305-018508179
