URDG758见索即付保函统一规则（双语版含附录）

见索即付保函统一规则（URDG758） （2010年修订本 含附录 双语互译） 前导部分——结构及概述 目录 工贸企业有限空间作业目录特种设备作业人员作业种类与目录特种设备作业人员目录1类医疗器械目录高值医用耗材参考目录 　　第1条　URDG的适用范围 　　第2条　定义 　　第3条　解释 　　第4条　开立和生效 　　第5条　保函和反担保函的独立性 　　第6条　单据与货物、服务或履约行为 　　第7条　非单据条件 　　第8条　指示和保函的内容 　　第9条　未被执行的申请 　　第10条　保函或保函修改书的通知 　　第11条　修改 　　第12条　保函项下担保人的责任范围 　　第13条　保函金额的变动 　　第14条　交单 　　第15条　索赔要求 　　第16条　索赔通知 　　第17条　部分索赔和多次索赔；索赔的金额 　　第18条　索赔的相互独立性 　　第19条　审单 　　第20条　索赔的审核时间；付款 　　第21条　付款的货币 　　第22条　相符索赔文件副本的传递 　　第23条　展期或付款 　　第24条　不相符索赔，不符点的放弃及通知 　　第25条　减额与终止 　　第26条　不可抗力 　　第27条　关于单据有效性的免责 　　第28条　关于信息传递和 翻译 阿房宫赋翻译下载德汉翻译pdf阿房宫赋翻译下载阿房宫赋翻译下载翻译理论.doc 的免责 　　第29条　关于使用其他方服务的免责 　　第30条　免责的限制 　　第31条　有关外国法律和惯例的补偿 　　第32条　费用的承担 　　第33条　保函转让与款项让渡 　　第34条　适用法律 　　第35条　司法管辖 　　附录 　中文附录 适用URDG758的见索即付保函格式* 　　可加入见索即付保函格式中的选择性条款 　　适用URDG758的见索即付反担保函格式 　　国际商会保函专项工作组工作章程 　　DOCDEX：解决 URDG争议的专业服务 　 适用URDG758的见索即付保函格式* 　　[担保人的信头或SWIFT标识代码] 　　致：[填写受益人的名称和联系信息] 　　日期：[填写开立日期] 　　保函种类：[标明是投标保函、预付款保函、履约保函、付款保函、留置金保函、质量保函等] 　　保函编号：[填写保函相关编号] 　　担保人：[填写名称及保函开立地址、除非在信头已表明] 　　申请人：[填写申请人的名称及地址] 　　受益人：[填写受益人的名称及地址] 　　基础关系：申请人关于[填写保函所基于的申请人与受益人之间的 合同 劳动合同范本免费下载装修合同范本免费下载租赁合同免费下载房屋买卖合同下载劳务合同范本下载 、招标条件、或其他关系的编号或其他信息]项下的义务 　　保函的金额与币种：[填写保函最高赔付的大小写金额及币种] 　　除下文明确要求的支持声明外，还需提交的任何支持索赔的单据：[填写需提交的任何支持索赔的附加单据。如果保函不需提交除索赔书和支持声明外的任何附加单据，此处空白或填写“没有”] 　　需提交单据的语言：[填写需提交单据的语言。除非另有规定，申请人或受益人出具单据使用的语言应与保函的语言一致。] 　　交单形式：[填写纸质形式或电子形式。如采用纸质形式，需指明交付方式。如采用电子形式，需指明交单的文件格式、信息提交的系统以及电子地址。] 　　交单地点：[采用纸质形式交单的情况下，担保人指明单据提交到其分支机构的地址；采用电子形式交单的情况下，指明电子地址，如担保人的SWIFT地址。如果本栏位未填写交单地点，则交单地点为前文中担保人开立保函的地点] 　　失效：[填写失效日期或描述失效事件] 　　费用的承担方：[填写费用承担方的名称] 　　作为担保人，我们在此不可撤销地承诺，在收到受益人提交的相符索赔后，向受益人支付最高不超过保函金额的任何款项。索赔应按上述交单形式提交，并随附前文列明的可能需提交的其他支持索赔的单据，并且在任何情况下提交一份受益人的声明，声明申请人在哪些方面违反了基础关系项下的义务。受益人的声明可以在索赔书中作出，也可以在一份单独签署的随附于该索赔书的单据中作出，或是在一份单独签署的指明该索赔书的单据中作出。 　　保函项下的任何索赔必须在前文规定的失效当日或之前，于前文指明的交单地点被我们收到。 　　本保函适用《见索即付保函统一规则（URDG）》2010年修订本，国际商会第758号出版物。 签字 可加入见索即付保函格式中的选择性条款 　　可以提交索赔的起始时间如不同于保函开立之日： 　　本保函项下的索赔可以自[指明日期之日起，或事件如：]提交 　　━ 申请人在担保人处所开立账户[指明账户号码]收到[填写将收到预付款的币种及准确金额]，这些汇款应标明其所对应的保函； 　　━ 担保人收到[填写将收到预付款的币种及准确金额]，并将贷记申请人在担保人处所开立的账户[指明账户号码]，这些汇款应标明其所对应是保函；*或 　　━ 向担保人提交一份声明，声明[投标保函已释放][满足下列条件的跟单信用证已开出：指明金额、开证方或保兑方及货物或服务的描述]或者[基础合同生效]。 　　金额变动条款 　　○ 保函金额可根据[选择下列一个或多个选项：]减少[填写保函金额的百分比或准确金额和币种] 　　━ 向担保人提交下列单据：[填写单据清单]； 　　━ 在保函中指明的指数导致减额的情况下[填写导致保函金额减少的指数数值]；或 　　━ （在付款保函的情况下）：汇款[填写准确金额和币种] 　　至受益人在担保人处所开立的账户[指名账户号码]，这些汇款记录应能够让担保人识别出其所对应的保函（例如：援引保函相关编号）。 　　○　保函金额可根据[选择下列一个或多个选项]增加[填写保函金额的百分比或准确金额和币种] 　　━ 向担保人提交下列单据：[填写单据清单] 　　━ 向担保人提交申请人的声明，声明由于基础合同扩大了工程范围或增加了工程价值，并指明新的工程价值的金额及币种；或 　　━ 在保函中指明的指数导致增额的情况下[填写导致保函金额增额的指数数值]。 　　受益人所提交的关于15条a款中支持声明的示范条款： 　　○　在投标保函的情况下，支持声明可声明： 　　申请人： 　　━ 在标期内撤标，或 　　━ 作为公告的中标人，申请人没有根据投标要约签订合同和/或没有按招标文件提供所要求的保函。 　　○　在履约保函的情况下，支持声明可声明： 　　申请人因[晚交付][未按期完成合同履约][合同项下规定提供的货物数量不足][交付的工程有质量缺陷]等违反了基础关系项下的义务。 　　○　在付款保函韵情况下，支持声明可声明： 　　申请人没有履行合同付款义务。 　　○　起草其他类型保函（预付款，留置金，交货，质量，维修等）项下的支持声明，可以使用概括性的表述，而无需受益人证实索赔，或在保函本身没有明确要求的情况下，无需提供违约的技术细节。 适用URDG758的见索即付反担保函格式 　　[反担保人的信头或SWIFT标识代码] 　　致：[填写担保人的名称和联系信息] 　　日期：[填写开立日期] 　　请按照以下文本向受益人开出你方保函，相关责任由我们承担： 　　[引用以下适用URDG758的见索即付保函格式，提供保函的简要信息或采用你方认为适用的保函格式] 　　保函种类：[标明是投标保函、预付款保函、履约保函、付款保函、留置金保函、质量保函等] 　　保函编号：[担保人填写保函相关编号] 　　担保人：[担保人填写名称及保函开立地址，除非在前文已表明] 　　申请人：[填写申请人的名称及地址] 　　受益人：[填写受益人的名称及地址] 　　基础关系：申请人关于[填写保函所基于的申请人与受益人之间的合同、招标条件、或其他关系的编号或其他信息]项下的义务 　　保函的金额与币种：[填写保函最高赔付的大小写金额及币种] 　　除下文明确要求的支持声明外，还需提交的任何支持索赔的单据：[填写需提交的任何支持索赔的附加单据。如果保函不需提交除索赔书和支持声明外的任何附加单据，此处空白或填写“没有”] 　　需提交单据的语言：[填写需提交单据的语言。除非另有规定，申请人或受益人出具单据使用的语言应与保函的语言一致] 　　交单形式：[填写纸质形式或电子形式。如采用纸质形式，需指明交付方式。如采用电子形式，需指明交单的文件格式、信息提交的系统以及电子地址] 　　交单地点：[采用纸质形式交单的情况下，担保人指明单据提交到其分支机构的地址；采用电子形式交单的情况下，指明电子地址，如担保人的SWIFT地址。如果本栏位未填写交单地点，则交单地点为前文中担保人开立保函的地点] 　　失效：[填写失效日期或描述失效事件] 　　费用的承担方：[填写费用承担方的名称] 　　作为担保人，我们在此不可撤销地承诺；在收到受益人提交的相符索赔后，向受益人支付最高不超过保函金额的任何款项。索赔应按上述交单形式提交，并随附前文列明的可能需提交的其他支持索赔的单据，并且在任何情况下提交一份受益人的声明，声明申请人在哪些方面违反了基础关系项下的义务。受益人的声明可以在索赔书中作出，也可以在一份单独签署的随附于该索赔书的单据中作出，或是在一份单独签署的指明该索赔书的单据中作出。 　　保函项下的任何索赔必须在前文规定的失效当日或之前，于前文指明的交单地点被我们收到。 　　本保函适用《见索即付保函统一规则（URDG）》2010年修订本，国际商会第758号出版物。 　　[引用结束] 　　作为反担保人，我们在此不可撤销地承诺，在收到担保人的相符索赔后，向担保人支付最高不超过下文所述反担保函金额的任何款项。索赔应按后文规定的交单形式提交，并随附担保人的声明，声明担保人在保函项下已收到相符索赔。担保人的声明可以在索赔书中作出，也可以在一份单独签署的随附于该索赔书的单据中作出，或是在一份单独签署的指明该索赔书的单据中作出。 　　反担保函项下的任何索赔必须在后文规定的失效当日或之前，于后文指明的交单地点被我们收到。 　　反担保函编号：[填写反担保函相关编号] 　　反担保人：[填写名称及保函开立地址，除非在信头已表明] 　　担保人：[填写担保人的名称及保函开立地址] 　　反担保函的金额与币种：[填写反担保函最高赔付的大小写金额及币种] 　　交单形式：[填写纸质形式或电子形式。如采用纸质形式，需指明交付方式。如采用电子形式，需指明交单的文件格式、信息提交的系统以及电子地址] 　　交单地点：[采用纸质形式交单的情况下，反担保人指明单据提交到其分支机构的地址；采用电子形式交单的情况下，指明电子地址，如反担保人的SWIFT地址。如果本栏位未填写交单地点，则交单地点为前文中反担保人开立保函的地点] 　　反担保函失效：[填写失效日期或描述失效事件。注意反担保函的失效因包含邮递期而通常晚于保函失效] 　　费用的承担方：[填写费用承担方的名称，通常由反担保人承担] 　　担保人在开出保函后应向反担保人确认。 　　本反担保函适用《见索即付保函统一规则（URDG）》2010年修订本，国际商会第758号出版物。 签字 国际商会保函专项工作组工作章程 　　1．保函专项工作组是由国际商会设立的专家组，致力于收集整理与国际保函实务有关的建议和制定新政策。该专项工作组的首轮任期为三年。到期后，除非由保函专项工作组或国际商会银行委员会投票决定将其解散，否则保函专项工作组的任期将每三年一任期自动延展下去。 　　2．保函专项工作组的成员主要来自国际商会银行委员会、商业法律与惯例委员会和金融与保险委员会。其他代表相关专业组织的具备相关专业经验的非国际商会成员也可以以观察员的身份申请加入保函专项工作组。 　　3．保函专项工作组的首要任务是在所有商务领域和全球各地区宣传推广见索即付保函统一规则，通过定期组织或参与本国、地区性和国际性研讨会，与专业机构和国际组织会谈，授权发行出版物等各种手段，促进其更为广泛的应用。保函专项工作组将关注国际保函实务、相关法律判决和仲裁决定、各国法律法规，以及保函领域内其他国际与地区组织的相关工作。 　　4．就保函领域内其他应由国际商会负责完成的工作，保函专项工作组也将考虑并向相关的国际商会委员会提出建议。 　　5．保函专项工作组将协助国际商会银行委员会的技术顾问解答与URDG有关的问 题 快递公司问题件快递公司问题件货款处理关于圆的周长面积重点题型关于解方程组的题及答案关于南海问题 ，同时协助他们在DOCDEX规则下做好技术顾问的工作。 　　6．如果国际商会的委员会、理事会或国际仲裁法庭秘书处提出要求，保函专项工作组可以答复任何与保函相关的问题，包括其他与保函相关的国际商会规则，如合约保函统一规则，以便确保国际商会处理不同类型保函实务所持立场能够保持一致，并协调保函领域国际商会所有规则和支持性服务的联合推广。 　　7．保函专项工作组将定期向国际商会银行委员会或根据其他国际商会委员会或理事会的要求汇报工作。 　　8．保函专项工作组将至少每年举办一次会议，或应主席要求随时召开，会议没有最低参会人数要求。 　　9．国际商会秘书处将同时承担保函专项工作组秘书处的职责。 成员名单 　　Georges Affaki（主席，法国），Karin Bachmayer（奥地利），Roeland Bertrams（荷兰），Rolf J．Breisig（德国）， Maximilian Burger-Scheidlin（奥地利），Mohammad M． Burjaq（约旦），Carlo Calosso（意大利），Roger F．Carouge （德国）， Gabriel Chami（黎巴嫩），Haluk Erdemol（土耳其）．Thomas B．Felsberg（巴西），Xavier Fornt（西班牙）， Michel Gally（法国）， Sir Roy Goode（英国），Andrea Hauptmann（奥地利），Zhou Hongjun（中国），Khaled Kawan（巴林） ，Gy?rgy Lampert（匈牙利）， Fredrik Lundberg（瑞典），Robert Marchal（比利时），Mi Na（中国），Antonio Maximiano　Nicoletti（巴西），Eva Oszi-Migléczi（匈牙利），Sae Woon Park（韩国），Christoph Martin Radtke（法国），Natalia A．　Rannikh（俄罗斯），Glenn Ransier（美国），Kate　Richardson（英国），Zuzana Rollova（捷克），Cristina Rooth（瑞典）， Don Smith（美国），Jeremy Smith（英国），Shri K．N．　Suvarna（印度），Pradeep Taneja（巴林），Farideh Tazhibi（伊朗） ，Pieris Theodorou（塞浦路斯），Edward Verhey（荷兰），Chen　WenYi（中国），Antonella Zanaboni（意大利）． 　　观察员： 　　Wilko Gunster（国际商会荷兰委员会），Alison Micheli（世界银行），Jean-Jacques Verdeaux（世界银行）． DOCDEX：解决 URDG争议的专业服务 　　国际商会跟单票据争议解决的专家方案（DOCDEX）规则为有效解决争议提供了一种可选择的渠道。通过这一规则，可以获得独立、公平和快捷的专家意见。 　　适用范围：DOCDEX规则适用于解决与下列规则相关的争议： 　　ICC见索即付保函统一规则（URDG） 　　ICC跟单信用证统一惯例（UCP） 　　ICC跟单信用证项下银行间偿付统一规则（URR） 　　ICC托收统一规则 （URC） 　　程序：发起DOCDEX程序的一方须向ICC国际专家技术中心（“中心”）提出申请。中心将在30天之内邀请相关方提供应答文件。随后，中心将立刻指定三位专家（“指定专家”）。 　　指定专家在收到案件所有相关文件后的30天内，做出专家意见（“DOCDEX意见”），无须听证。 　　质量监控：在收到DOCDEX意见后，将由中心的ICC银行委员会的技术顾问或其指定的代表对DOCDEX意见进行评判，以确认DOCDEX意见与ICC银行委员会现行的规则和解释相符。技术顾问或其指定的代表对DOCDEX意见的修改须征得大多数指定专家的同意。 　　专家：指定专家由中心从ICC银行委员会的专家名单中选出。专家名单由全球经验丰富并且熟悉相关ICC规则的国际专家组成。指定专家的姓名不会向争议当事各方披露。 　　DOCDEX意见的性质：除非争议当事各方同意采用DOCDEX处理争议，否则DOCDEX意见不对争议当事各方具有约束力。然而，DOCDEX意见为他们的争议提供了极具参考价值的评估意见，并促进争议的友好解决。 　　时间：当事各方通常会在提出申请后的60天内收到DOCDEX意见。 　　费用： 标准 excel标准偏差excel标准偏差函数exl标准差函数国标检验抽样标准表免费下载红头文件格式标准下载 收费为5，000美元。在特殊情况下，最多另收5，000美元的额外费用。DOCDEX意见所有费用合计不超过10，000美元。 　　DOCDEX规则的相关情况可查询www．iccdocdex．org 　　DOCDEX规则由ICC国际商会的国际专家技术中心（中心）与ICC银行技术与惯例委员会联合制定。 　　*URDG758项下的见索即付保函和反担保函的格式及随后几页中建议的选择性条款，仅供参考使用。它们并不是本规则内容的一部分。 　　*这条建议的生效条款，与前一条一样，都经常在预付款保函和留置金保函中适用。在这两种情况下，此条款都是确保受益人在基础合同项下将应付款项支付给申请人之前，不能提出索赔。有两种方法起草这一条款，第一种方法如第一条所示，只有在该款项有效地贷记到申请人账户之后保函才生效。受益人/付款人承担转账错误或第三方扣押的风险。另一种起草方法如第二条所示，只要持有申请人账户的担保人收到付款，受益人的义务视为已经履行。贷记付款至申请人账户的任何延迟由申请人和担保人依据银行-客户关系协议或法律规定解决。 见索即付保函统一规则（URDG758）双语版（含附录） 目 录 8Article 1 Application of URDG 本规则的适用范围 Article 2 Definitions 定义8 Article 3 Interpretation 解释11 Article 4 Issue and effectiveness 开立和生效12 Article 5 Independence of guarantee and counter-guarantee 保函和反担保函的独立性13 Article 6 Documents v. goods, services or performance 单据和货物、服务或者履约行为13 Article 7 Non-documentary conditions 非单据条件13 Article 8 Content of instructions and guarantees 指示和保函的内容14 Article 9 Application not taken up 拒绝接受申请15 Article 10 Advising of guarantee or amendment 保函或者保函修改的通知15 Article 11 Amendments 修改16 Article 12 Extent of guarantor's liability under guarantee 保函项下担保人责任的范围17 Article 13 Variation of amount of guarantee 保函金额的变动17 Article 14 Presentation 交单17 Article 15 Requirements for demand 对索偿要求的要求19 Article 16 Information about demand 关于索偿要求的告知19 Article 17 Partial demand and multiple demands; amount of demands 部分索偿要求和多次索偿要求，索偿要求的金额 20 Article 18 Separateness of each demand 每一次索偿要求的独立性21 Article 19 Examination 审核21 Article 20 Time for examination of demand; payment 审核索偿要求的时间，付款22 Article 21 Currency of payment 支付的货币22 Article 22 Transmission of copies of complying demand 相符索偿要求副本的传递23 Article 23 Extend or pay 展期或付款23 Article 24 Non-complying demand, waiver and notice 非相符索偿要求，放弃决定和通知25 Article 25 Reduction and termination 减额与终止26 Article 26 Force majeure 不可抗力27 Article 27 Disclaimer on effectiveness of documents 关于单据有效性的免责28 Article 28 Disclaimer on transmission and translation 关于传递和翻译的免责29 Article 29 Disclaimer for acts of another party 关于其他当事方行为的免责29 Article 30 Limits on exemption from liability 责任豁免的限度30 Article 31 Indemnity for foreign laws and usages 外国法律和惯例的补偿30 Article 32 Liability for charges 关于费用的责任30 Article 33 Transfer of guarantee and assignment of proceeds 保函的转让和款项让渡30 Article 34 Governing law 管辖法律32 Article 35 Jurisdiction 司法管辖权32 见索即付保函统一规则（URDG758）双语版（含附录） The URDG 758 are the Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees - effective 01 July 2010. URDG 758指引 Introduction The new URDG 758 succeed URDG 458. Over 17 years of practice (1992 - 2009), URDG 458 proved to be both successful and reliable. They were used by banks and businesses across continents and industry sectors. URDG 458 were endorsed by international organizations, multilateral financial institutions, bank regulators, lawmakers and professional federations. In contrast to the failed Uniform Rules for Contract Guarantees (URCG 325), URDG 458 reflected the reality of the international demand guarantee market and struck the most reasonable balance between the interests of all the parties involved. By choosing to instruct a guarantor to issue a demand guarantee subject to URDG, applicants renounced their ability to obstruct payment for reasons derived from their relationship with the beneficiary. In turn, beneficiaries were expected to state in general terms - but not to justify, establish or prove - the nature of the applicant's breach in the performance of the underlying relationship. Finally, because a demand guarantee is an independent undertaking, guarantors were assured that their commitment was subject to its own terms. They were insulated from the performance contingencies of the underlying relationship. Their incremental use, backed by the support of ICC, enabled URDG 458 to make a critical contribution towards levelling the playing field among demand guarantee issuers and users regardless of the legal, economic or social system in which they operate. Yet, URDG 458 formed the first attempt by ICC to codify independent guarantee practice. Over the years, the application of their provisions shed light on the need for drafting adjustments, clarifications, expansion of scope or clear corrections of the adopted standard. Views reported to the ICC Task Force on Guarantees from URDG users worldwide provided the necessary material to launch a revision of URDG 458 that both the lapse of time and the evolution of practice made necessary. The revision was launched in 2007 and was conducted under the aegis of both the ICC Banking Commission and the Commission on Commercial Law and Practice (CLP). The ICC Task Force on Guarantees, the standing expert body created by ICC in 2003 to monitor international guarantee practice, acted as a consultative body to a Drafting Group that produced five comprehensive drafts during the two and a half year revision process. Each draft was submitted for review and comments to ICC national committees. Over 600 sets of comments were received from a total of 52 countries and were thoroughly examined. These comments were instrumental in shaping the new rules. Regular progress reports were presented to meetings of each of the ICC commissions considering the rules and were comprehensively debated. This method ensured that the revision takes into account views received from a broad cross-sector of concerned parties. The resulting URDG 758 were adopted by the ICC Executive Board on 3 December 2009, following endorsement by the members of the two sponsoring commissions. They will come into force on July 1, 2010. The new rules apply to any demand guarantee or counter-guarantee where incorporated by reference in the text. They can also apply as trade usage or by implication from a consistent course of dealing between the parties to the demand guarantee or counter-guarantee where so provided by the applicable law. The new URDG 758 do not merely update URDG 458; they are the result of an ambitious process that seeks to bring a new set of rules for demand guarantees into the 21st century, rules that are clearer, more precise and more comprehensive. Clearer URDG. The new URDG 758 aim for clarity. They adopt the drafting style of ICC's universally accepted Uniform Rules for Documentary Credits (UCP 600) by bringing together the definitions of terms in one article. They also bring a much needed clarification of the process according to which a presentation will be checked for conformity. More precise URDG. A number of the standards contained in URDG 458 left a margin for interpretation that varied according to the particular facts of the case. This was particularly true for the terms "reasonable time" and "reasonable care". The new URDG have excluded all imprecise standards with an aim to foster certainty and predictability. Examples are time durations for the examination of a demand, the extension of a guarantee in the case of force majeure, and the suspension of the guarantee in the case of an extend or pay demand. More comprehensive URDG. Important practices were left out of URDG 458. This was particularly the case for the advice of a guarantee, amendments, standards for examination of presentations, partial, multiple and incomplete demands, linkage of documents, and transfer of guarantees. In addition, there was only fragmentary treatment of counter-guarantees. What was understandable at the time of the first attempt to codify demand guarantee practice can no longer be accepted 17 years later. The new URDG 758 now cover all of these practices and make clear that provisions governing guarantees apply equally to counter-guarantees. Balanced URDG. The new URDG 758 endorse and build on the balanced approach that characterized URDG 458. For example: - The beneficiary is entitled to payment upon presentation of a complying demand without the need for the guarantor to seek the applicant's approval. The new URDG also correct an unfair situation that would have left the beneficiary without recourse to the guarantee in the case of force majeure if its expiry coincided with the interruption of the guarantor's business. - The guarantor's independent role is expressed in stronger and clearer terms and, more importantly, it is now expressed in exclusively documentary terms. The new URDG expect the guarantor to act diligently. For instance, a guarantor is expected to reject a non-complying demand within five business days by sending a rejection notice that lists all of the discrepancies; otherwise, the guarantor will be precluded from claiming that the demand is non-complying and will be compelled to pay. Largely accepted in documentary credit practice under the UCP, the preclusion sanction is necessary to discipline unfair practices that work to the detriment of the beneficiary. - The applicant's right to be informed of the occurrence of the key stages in the lifecycle of the guarantee is acknowledged in the new rules. However, this information should not be a prerequisite for payment when a complying demand is presented. Innovative URDG. The new URDG 758 feature a number of innovations dictated by the development of practice and the need to avoid disputes. An example is the new rule that proposes a substitution of currencies when payment in the currency specified in the guarantee becomes impossible. Another example is the new termination mechanism for guarantees that state neither an expiry date nor an expiry event. This solution is expected to reduce the number of open-ended guarantees that severely penalize applicants and are incompatible with the banks' capital requirements. The Guide. The rationale, preparatory work and interpretation of each article of the new URDG 758 can be found in a separately released Guide to the rules (ICC Publication No. 702). The new URDG 758 package. The new rules are accompanied by a model guarantee and counter-guarantee form featured at the end of this publication. They are destined to evolve into an indispensable companion to the new URDG 758 and their users. Experience shows that a comprehensive ready-to-use package that combines both the rules and model forms is more attractive to users than the previously separate ICC publications Nos. 458 and 503. It should also be conducive to more harmonized a practice. In drafting the new URDG 758 model guarantee form, a unitary approach was preferred to one that would have consisted of multiple forms linked to the purpose of each guarantee. Tender, performance, advance payment, retention money, warranty and other types of demand guarantees share the same nature and have similar features. This was evidenced by the five nearly identical basic model guarantee forms in ICC publication No. 503 that accompanied URDG 458. Of course, URDG 758 users have the option of enriching the unitary model form with one or more of the clauses proposed at the end of this publication such as the reduction of amount clause for advance payment guarantees or even drafting any other clause outright. A final message: the need for clear drafting. Clear drafting is the linchpin of a successful international demand guarantee practice. This has proven to be the case over time and across cultures and industry sectors. Using the new URDG 758 model guarantee form levels the playing field and avoids misunderstandings. As such, it will hopefully significantly curb the worrying tendency that a few courts have shown in recent years to re-characterize demand guarantees as accessory suretyships - or the reverse. While sometimes warranted by the ambiguous terms used by the parties, such interference has considerably destabilized the international guarantee market by adding a particularly prejudicial element of uncertainty. Such a regrettable situation can be remedied by a consistent use of URDG 758 and their accompanying model form in any type of demand guarantee or counter-guarantee or, indeed, any other independent undertaking. Acknowledgments. I would like to express my deep appreciation to the members of the ICC Task Force on Guarantees*, the ICC national committees and members of both the Banking Commission and CLP for their guidance, support and constructive participation in the revision. The Guarantees Department of RZB was very helpful in processing the hundreds of national comments received throughout the revision process and compiling them for the Drafting Group's review. It was my privilege to chair the Drafting Group that undertook the revision. The members of the Drafting Group are listed below in alphabetical order: Roger Carouge (Germany), Sir Roy Goode (United Kingdom),Dr Andrea Hauptmann (Austria), Glenn Ransier (United States), Pradeep Taneja (Bahrain), and Farideh Tazhibi(Islamic Republic of Iran). Rarely has a chairman been blessed with a group whose members are so experienced and enthusiastic about the subject at hand, animated by team spirit, complementary in their regional and sectoral experience and able to endure with admirable patience the inevitable challenges of a fast-track revision process. The