Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Ucp 600 interpretation

Legal area

Court

3 May 2010

SWISS SINGAPORE OVERSEAS ENTERPRISES PTE LTD v. CHINA CITIC BANK CORPORATION LTD, XIAMEN BRANCH

Citation

SWISS SINGAPORE OVERSEAS ENTERPRISES PTE LTD v. CHINA CITIC BANK CORPORATION LTD, XIAMEN BRANCH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL11/2009

MT752 amounted to an outward binding acceptance by the issuing bank under UCP 600 Article 15(a); the Bank could not validly rescind that acceptance by subsequent communications that did not comply with Article 16's single-notice requirement; Swiss had standing and no arguable defence was shown, so the Hong Kong court declined a stay and entered judgment for Swiss for the unpaid difference plus negotiated interest.
14 Dec 2009

FIRST COMMERCIAL BANK, LTD v. BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

FIRST COMMERCIAL BANK, LTD v. BANK OF CHINA (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCL24/2008

FCB's presentation was invalid because FCB negotiated and paid the beneficiary against a non‑complying presentation (the 1st Cargo Receipt); UCP Art.7(c) requires that the nominated bank forward the documents it purchased upon a beneficiary's complying presentation, so BOC had no obligation to reimburse. Independently, the 3rd Cargo Receipt was non‑compliant because its chop did not match the specimen provided and contravened the express verification instruction in the credit, so BOC was not required to pay even if FCB could have validly presented it.