CDCS全真模拟试题

皓空贸易单证网整理 CDCS EXAM EXERCISE 1、A documentary credit subject to U C P500bears a title "I rrevocable D ocumentary C redit"has a special condition as follows: "This documentary credit will become inoperative upon receipt of a cable to this effect from the issuing bank after issuance." A fter receipt of such a cable advice,the beneficiary made a presentation nevertheless.The issuing bank sent a refusal notice by S W I FT pointing out a discrepancy as follows: "D ocuments presented after expiry of the documentary credit render the presentation discrepant." I s the issuing bank correct in its refusal? 2、I s the following refusal notice acceptable for a DC subject to U C P500? "We refuse the documents and have found the following three discrepancies in the presented documents: (1)The port of discharge in the B/L is not the same as that stated in the DC. (2)Presentation after expiry. (3)C orrections in the certificate of origin are not authenticated by the issuer." 1 3、What is an"unconfirmed letter of credit"under U C P500? 4、I s it possible that a confirmed letter of credit subject to U C P 500becomes an unconfirmed letter of credit without the consent of the beneficiary? 5、I s the following refusal notice acceptable for a DC subject to U C P500? "We have found the following three discrepancies in the presented documents: (1)The port of discharge in the B/L is not the same as that stated in the DC. (2)Presentation after expiry. (3)C orrections in the certificate of origin are not authenticated by the issuer. M eanwhile we are holding the documents at your disposal and risk." 6、A n applicant informed the issuing bank that the goods were rubbish and asked the issuing bank to freeze payment under a DC subject to U C P500due to trade frauds although the documents presented were all compliant.S hould the issuing bank follow the instructions from the applicant? 7、I s this refusal notice acceptable for a DC subject to U C P 500? "We refuse to pay you due to the following three discrepancies: (1)The commercial invoice does not meet the terms and conditions of the DC. (2)Third party B/L presented. (3)Unclean B/L presented. M eanwhile we are holding the documents at your disposal and risk." 8、A DC subject to U C P500issued by Bank I was confirmed by Bank C expiring on1S eptember2002.There was no restriction on the presentation.The beneficiary presented the documents to Bank I on29A ugust2002.I s this the best practice?What are the risks? 9、A presenting bank had the following messages in its covering letter/schedule dated24J une2003presented against a DC subject to U C P500. "We have found the following discrepancies in the documents: (1)The port of discharge in the B/L is not the same as that stated in the DC. (2)Presentation after expiry. (3)C orrections in the certificate of origin are not authenticated by the issuer. The documents are now presented for collection.Please approach the applicant for a waiver and give us your authority to negotiate by S W I FT message." The issuing bank sent its refusal notice as follows: "A fter consulting the applicant,we determine to refuse the documents due to the three discrepancies with the underlying reasons as stipulated in your covering letter/schedule dated 24J une2003. M eanwhile,we are holding the documents at your disposal and risk." 10、A nominated paying bank sent three refusal notices on the same day under a DC subject to U C P500.The first notice was sent by fax listing all the discrepancies with reasons;the second notice made by telephone advising payment dishonour and the third notice sent by telex advising that documents were returned to the presenter by local courier. I s this acceptable?Please state your reasons. 11、U C P500 A rticle2states that: "For the purpose of these A rticles,branches of a bank in different countries are considered another bank." C harles del Busto explained in ICC Publication No.511"U C P 500and400C ompared"that the underlying reason is because branches of the bank in different countries may be subject to different jurisdictions.What is legal in the head office of a bank may not be legal in its branches in different countries. Hong Kong was a British territory before1J uly1997. A fter1 J uly1997,Hong Kong became part of the People's R epublic of C hina(P RC)but it practises"One C ountry Two S ystems" whereby the applicable law in Hong Kong is the Basic Law (C ommon Law)whereas that of P RC is C ivil Law. On24J une2003,a documentary credit subject to U C P500 issued by Bank A B C Beijing Head Office was advised by its branch in Hong Kong.There were disputes on the discrepancies between the Beneficiary and the Bank A B C Head Office.The Beneficiary's law firm served a strong letter to Bank A B C Hong Kong Branch showing its intent to sue it in Hong Kong unless payment was made within14days.Bank A B C Hong Kong Branch replied as follows: "D ue to different jurisdictions between Hong Kong and P RC, we are in fact a different bank according to the provisions of U C P500 A rticle2,based on the interpretation of C harles del Busto in ICC Publication No.511"U C P500and400 C ompared".Hence as an advising bank we have no payment obligations.Your client,as a beneficiary,should sue our Head Office in Beijing instead." I s the defence of Bank A B C Hong Kong Branch correct? 12、The applicant showed to the beneficiary a written undertaking from the issuing bank for its agreement to issue a letter of credit subject to U C P500.However,due to change in financial position of the applicant,the issuing bank later decided not to do so.The beneficiary wrote to the issuing bank to force its commitment in writing.I s the beneficiary successful?Please give your reasons. 13、Under which condition that a confirmed letter of credit subject to U C P500may become unconfirmed without the consent of the beneficiary? 14、I n determination of the compliance of a refusal notice with the U C P500,should the stipulations of U C P500 A rticles13 and14be read separately for(a)document examination for compliance,(b)determination of refusal or acceptance and(c) sending of the refusal notice respectively? 15、One set of D rafts drawn on the drawee bank presented under a documentary credit subject to U C P500expiring on 30 A ugust2002was accepted on30J uly2002for30days deferred payment but was unpaid on maturity30A ugust 2002.A ccording to U C P500A rticle9(a)(iii)(b)the beneficiary made a new set of"replacement" D rafts drawing on the issuing bank on3 S eptember2002.The issuing bank refused to pay the D rafts because they were drawn and presented after expiry of the DC. I s the issuing bank correct in its decision?Please state your reasons. 16、A n issuing bank sent its refusal notice on the7th banking day after receipt of the documents presented under U C P500. I n fact a simple set of documents was presented for sales of kitchenware,consisting of a total of12pages of documents. I s this refusal notice sent within reasonable time? 17、A n issuing bank sent its refusal notice to a presentation under U C P500to a presenting bank overseas by courier. I s this acceptable? 18、Under U C P500,can a beneficiary,through a presenting bank,have the right to present documents against a confirmed letter of credit directly to the issuing bank? 19、A standby letter of credit subject to U C P500was issued to back up an"open account"transaction where payment was made only30days after the"shipped on board"date.The standby required presentation of D rafts in duplicate,one D efault S tatement signed by the Beneficiary,one copy of C ommercial I nvoice and one copy of"shipped on board"B/L. I t also specified that no presentation could be made until after default in payment.The I ssuing Bank sent its R efusal Notice as follows: "We refuse to pay due to the following discrepancy in the B/L: The copy of B/L was presented more than21days after shipment,which is against the stipulation in U C P500 A rticle 43(a)." I s the I ssuing Bank correct in its refusal decision? 20、For a DC subject to U C P500,what should the presenting bank advise the beneficiary who asks for direct presentation to the issuing bank,thereby by-passing the confirming bank? 21、A standby L C issued by Bank I was confirmed by Bank C expiring on1 S eptember2002.There was no restriction on the presentation.The beneficiary presented the documents to Bank I on29 A ugust2002but was wrongly dishonoured on2 S eptember2002relying on invalid discrepancies,such as the commercial invoice was not marked"original"whereas the standby L C did not ask for such marking.The documents were returned to the beneficiary that received them on5 S eptember2002.The beneficiary presented the same documents without any alteration to the confirming bank on 6S eptember2002.The refusal notice from the confirming bank stated: "We refuse to pay due to presentation made after expiry of the standby L C. M eantime we are holding the documents at your disposal and risk." I s the confirming bank right in its refusal under IS P98? 22、C ase S tudy A beneficiary put in its purchase agreement a special condition:"Payment by a confirmed letter of credit"and a "confirmed letter of credit"subject to U C P500was advised by the advising bank,which was also the nominated paying bank for at sight payment with reimbursements subject to U RR 525 by an independent reimbursing bank.When the issuing bank in country A was ordered by the local government to freeze payment due to foreign exchange control,the beneficiary presented the compliant documents(later certified by the ICC D O CDEX D ecision)to the nominated paying bank in country B, but no payment was made.What are the reasons? 23、A beneficiary made a compliant presentation under a documentary credit subject to U C P500.The applicant showed to the issuing bank that the same beneficiary had made fraudulent presentation under another documentary credit issued by another bank and instructed the issuing bank not to pay the beneficiary.The issuing bank did not follow the instruction and paid the beneficiary.The applicant refused to reimburse the issuing bank. I s the applicant right in doing so? Please give your reasons. 24、I s the nominated paying bank in question10subject to the sanction under U C P500 A rticle14(e)? 25、A DC subject to U C P500has the following stipulation: "Purchase C ontract No.123456dated24J une2003attached herewith forms an integral part of this documentary credit." I s this stipulation acceptable and what are the risks? 26、C ase S tudy A documentary credit subject to U C P500called for"Full set of 3/3clean on board original marine/ocean bills of lading evidencing shipment from Houston to S hanghai made out to order and blank endorsed,marked freight prepaid,notifying applicant".The presented bill of lading,bearing a title of "M ermaid S hipping C ompany S.A.,Geneva",was manually signed with a signature chop reading"C arrier-M ermaid S hipping C ompany S.A.,Geneva".The"Place and D ate of I ssue"box contained a statement:"New Orleans- M ermaid S hipping C ompany(U SA) I nc.,17J uly200312:12:22pm". I s this bill of lading acceptable?Please state your reasons. 27、C ase S tudy Upon request by the applicant,the issuing bank finally waived the previously advised valid discrepancy for the first instalment shipment made after the latest shipment date in a DC subject to U C P500that clearly stated the shipping period of three instalment shipments.However,the issuing bank did not clarify whether or not the DC was still valid for subsequent instalment shipments. A fter a period of time,the beneficiary presented compliant documents for the second instalment shipment made according to the shipping schedule stated in the DC.The issuing bank denied payment according to U C P500A rticle 41. The beneficiary sued the issuing bank for payment dishonour and negligence. (1)The expert's report from the beneficiary states that the confusion is created by the issuing bank that should have clarified in its waiver notice whether or not the DC is still valid for the second and the third instalment shipments.S o the issuing bank should bear the serious consequences for its negligence and should effect payment of the second instalment shipment,since the documents are all compliant. (2)The expert's report from the issuing bank states that: a.There is no stipulation in the U C P500that requires the issuing bank to state its intention/decision on the validity of the balanced instalment shipments after waiving the discrepancy in the first instalment shipment. b. D iscrepancy and waiver are two separate issues.The wavier cannot change the nature of a discrepancy. A discrepancy always remains a discrepancy,whether being waived or not. c.The discrepancy will trigger the following two consequences: 1.To dishonour payment according to U C P500 A rticles9, 13&14,and 2.To make the DC no more available for all future instalment shipments according to U C P500 A rticle41. d. S o the wavier only waives the first consequence regarding payment but the second consequence affecting balanced instalment shipments remains unwaived. e. A s a result,the issuing bank has no payment obligation for the second and the third instalment shipments. I f you were the J udge,what would you adjudicate?Please state the reasons of your judicial decisions. 28、A n I nsurance Policy Not I ndicating Number of Originals I ssued A DC subject to U C P500calls for full set of insurance policy but is silent on the number of originals issued.The issuing bank refuses to pay due to the insurance policy presented does not indicate number of originals issued. I s the issuing bank correct in naming this as a discrepancy? 29、Port of Loading D ifferent from DC The DC subject to U C P500requires port of discharge to be "A lexandria(Free Zone)"whereas in the"port of discharge" box in the bill of lading,it states only"A lexandria".However, the same bill of lading also has information"C F R A lexandria Port Free Zone"appearing in other area. I s the bill of lading discrepant? 30、S ignature in a Bill of Lading Not I n the S ignature Box I n a bill of lading presented under a DC subject to U C P500, the signature box is empty.However,in other area of the same bill of lading,there is a signature of the master with the name and capacity of the master given. I s this bill of lading compliant? 31、A n insurance policy is issued on10J anuary2004and the DC specifies the latest shipment date as15J anuary2004.The loaded on bard date in the bill of lading is9J anuary2004. I s the insurance policy discrepant under U C P500? 32、Partial S hipments The DC subject to U C P500called for supply of freshly cut logs and prohibited partial shipments.I t specified port of loading"A ny M alaysian port".Goods were shipped on the same vessel loading at different ports in M alaysia at different time periods under the same voyage number for the same destination.D ifferent sets of bills of lading and related documents(certificates of inspection etc)were presented under the same DC.The issuing bank refused to pay due to following reasons: a.Bills of lading show more than one port of loading whereas the DC calls for only one port of loading,namely"A ny M alaysia Port"and not"A ny M alaysian port S". Three sets of bills of lading and inspection certificates are presented instead of one set intended in the DC. b.P artial shipments made and this is not allowed in the DC. c. I s the issuing bank correct in its refusal? 33、C onsignee D ifferent from DC R equirement The DC subject to U C P500required the C onsignee of a negotiable bill of lading made to the order of Party A but the negotiable bill of lading presented was consigned to the order of Party B.However,there was an endorsement from Party B to the order of Party A on the face of the bill of lading.The issuing bank dishonoured due to name of C onsignee in the bill of lading was not meeting the DC requirement. I s this a discrepancy? 34、R easons for changing the name of consignee as specified in the DC Please state your reasons why the bill of lading is not made out straight to the order of Party A as specified in the DC under the above case"C onsignee D ifferent from DC R equirement"? 35、R eimbursement instructions A DC subject to U C P500specified a reimbursement instruction that reads: "Upon receipt of full set of documents in conformity with the letter of credit terms and conditions,we will effect payment as per your instructions". C ompliant presentation was made to the nominated negotiating bank that had given value to the beneficiary and claimed for reimbursements.The documents were however lost in transit by the courier company.The issuing bank refused reimbursement because reimbursement would only be effective"upon receipt of documents"as specified in the reimbursement instruction quoted above. I s the issuing bank correct in its refusal decision? 36、DC Number missing A DC subject to U C P500specified that the DC number must be quoted in all documents presented.The commercial invoice did not quote the DC No.and the issuing bank refused payment. I s the issuing bank correct in its refusal? 37、D ocuments not consistent I n a DC subject to U C P500,the issuing bank gave a refusal notice that read: "We refuse payment due to following discrepancies: The commercial invoice and the bill of lading are not consistent with each other. M eanwhile we hold documents at your risk and disposal". I s this refusal notice valid? 38、D ocuments inconsistent I n a DC subject to U C P500,the issuing bank gave a refusal notice that read: "We refuse payment due to following discrepancies: The commercial invoice and the bill of lading are inconsistent with each other. M eanwhile we hold documents at your risk and disposal". I s this refusal notice valid? 39、I nterpretation of CI F A n L C subject to U C P500was issued on1 M ay2005stating the total value of the goods as"U SD 200,000 CI F Hong Kong" and a commercial invoice stating"U SD 200,000CI F Hong Kong I ncoterms2000"was presented. The I ssuing Bank considered this as a discrepancy.The reasons are: "CI F"does not exist only in I ncoterms. I t is also found in other trade terms,such as the U SA Trade D efinitions,the Warsaw Trade Terms and the like.The A pplicant may not mean I ncoterms. E ven if the parties do mean I ncoterms,it may be I ncoterms 1990other than I ncoterms2000. I s the I ssuing Bank correct in its determination of this discrepancy?Please state your reasons. 40、Port of Loading&Port of D ischarge A n L/C issued in Hong Kong and confirmed by a bank in Taiwan subject to U C P500requires a port-to-port bill of lading showing: Port of Loading: C ome by C hance, C anada Port of D ischarge: A ny port in C hina A port-to-port bill of lading is presented showing: Port of Loading: C ome by C hance, C anada Port of D ischarge:Kaohsiung The C onfirming Bank in Taiwan rejected the bill of lading stating: a."C ome by chance in C anada"means"A ny port at which the goods happen to be discharged in C anada". C ome by C hance is not the name of a port.The Port of Loading should show the name of a port in C anada,such as Toronto,as required by U C P500sub-A rticle23(a)(iii). b. R epublic of C hina(Taiwan)is an independent country and not part of"C hina"according to President C hen S hui-bien(陳水扁)and the D emocratic Progressive Party(民主進步黨). A ccordingly"C hina"should mean"People's R epublic of C hina". c.Hence"A ny port in C hina"should mean any port in People's R epublic of C hina,such as S hanghai and not any port in R epublic of C hina(Taiwan),such as Kaohsiung. I s the C onfirming Bank right in its rejection? A nd why?