We assist companies to access trade and receivables finance through our relationships with 270+ banks, funds and alternative finance houses.
Get StartedADVERTISEMENT
The Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (“UCP”) is the rule governing the Documentary credits. It was established by the international chamber of commerce (ICC) to mitigate the doubts caused by individual countries promoting their own national rules on documentary credit practice. The objective, since attained, was to create a set of contractual rules that would establish uniformity in that practice, obtain global understanding, a common interpretation and application of documentary credit, so that practitioners would not have to cope with plenty of conflicting national regulations. UCP is the most successful set of private rules for trade ever developed.
The first version of the rules published by ICC in 1933 known as (UCP 82), it has been revised six times to keep pace with market needs and practices, in 1951 (UCP 151), 1962 (UCP 222), 1974 (UCP 290), 1983 (UCP 400), 1993 (UCP 500) and the latest version in 2007 known as (UCP 600). First published in December 2006 and implemented on 1 July 2007.
UCP 600 is the fruit of more than three years of work by the International Chamber of Commerce’s (ICC) Commission on Banking Technique and Practice. One of the most important objectives of the UCP 600 is providing easier language and addressing the progress in various industries to unify the interpretation and application of documentary credits.
it comprises of 39 articles to cover the following:
The publication provides the text of each article, the changes from UCP 500, the commentary explaining and analysing each article and sub-article of UCP 600 and cross-reference to other articles.
The commentary reflects the view of the drafting group, users of the commentary should also be aware that the decision to accept or reject documents depends on the terms and conditions of the credit, the applicable provisions of UCP 600 not the commentary and international standard banking practice.
The introduction to the commentary on UCP 600 states: ‘the writing of the Commentary proved to be more difficult than drafting the rules themselves.’
With around 5000 comments received by the Drafting Group during the revision process, it was impossible for them to provide feedback on every issue that did or did not make it into the text of UCP 600.
These issues included, amongst others, the following items:
All of the points were debated at some length by national committees tasked with providing input, so that the Drafting Group could gauge where their representatives on the Banking Commission wished an article to be positioned.
The objective of the commentary to enlighten practitioners about the processes behind the changes in each article and to explain why a change was introduced, why no change was made, why some issues may appear new but are not, i.e., a clarification rather than a change, and to suggest the way the wording in UCP 600 should be understood and applied.
As a result of the huge growth in the volume of inter-bank currency reimbursements remained largely subject to locally accepted practice in the major financial centres, with the one exception of the U.S.A, where banks had formulated their own operating rules, moreover, the practices around bank-to-bank reimbursements under documentary credits developed into more complicated procedures followed by banks not a party to the documentary credits providing the beneficiary with reimbursement promptly. To meet the need for international standards and to assist trade facilitation, the ICC banking commission authorized a working party to draft the Uniform Rules for Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements (URR 525) in 1993 and implemented on 1 July 1996.
The update to URR 525 was necessary to bring the URR rules into conformity with the UCP 600, in April 2008 URR 725 was approved by the ICC national committees and implemented in October 2008. URR 725 should not be seen as a revision of URR 525. It is an updating process that has followed the same manner as the eUCP, i.e. to change the style to match that of UCP 600.
Banks that are requested or authorized to add their confirmation often require from an issuing bank before adding their confirmation to specify a reimbursing bank instead of reimbursed directly by an issuing bank. UCP 600 article 13, covers basic principles for bank-to-bank reimbursements. URR 725 covers these principles in more details and clarification, such as general provisions and definitions, liabilities and responsibilities, form and notification of authorizations, amendments and claims and miscellaneous provisions.
It comprises of 17 articles as the following:
With the approval of UCP 600 in October 2006, it has become necessary to provide an updated version of the International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under Documentary Credits (ISBP 645). The first version was Issued in 2003, it was felt appropriate, paragraphs that appeared in Publication 645 and that have been covered in effectively the same text in UCP 600 have been removed from the updated version of ISBP, publication 681 is the first revision of ISBP 645. The introduction to UCP 600, states: ‘During the revision process, notice was taken of the considerable work that had been completed in creating the International Standard Banking Practice for the Examination of Documents under Documentary Credits (ISBP), ICC Publication 645’.
A fully revised version of ISBP 681 was undertaken, in July 2013 ISBP 745 was published. It filled a gap between the general rules of the UCP 600 and the daily job of the documentary credit practitioners and provides coverage of documents which are not specifically mentioned in UCP 600, as well as, it serves as a valuable tool for parties to correctly apply the principles of UCP 600 and accurately interpret and clarify conditions appearing within documentary credits, it covers a range of practices outlined by ICC Opinions issued since 2007, decisions of the ICC Banking Commission, and has been extended to cover documents including non-negotiable sea waybill, beneficiary certificate, packing list, weight list, beneficiary certificates, analysis, inspection, health, phytosanitary, quantity and quality certificates.
It should be noted ISBP 745 doesn’t modify or exclude UCP 600 articles and both should be read in their entirety and not in isolation. To emphasize this point, paragraph i. of Preliminary Considerations reads “This publication is to be read in conjunction with UCP 600 and not in isolation.”
Thierry Senechal, ICC Senior Policy Manager and Banking Commission Executive Secretary said: “This guide has developed into an invaluable aid to banks, corporates, logistics specialists and insurance companies alike, on a global basis, when creating documents for presentation, or for the examination of documents presented under, a documentary credit.”
Gary Collyer, Chair of the Drafting Group for the revision of ISBP, said: “Rejection rates have decreased since the original launch of the ISBP guide in 2002 and it is acknowledged that a major contributing factor to this is the application of the practices detailed in ISBP.”
Each section begins with an alphabetical letter as the following:
The ICC recommendation and guidance papers do not amend the UCP rules or International Standard Banking Practice (ISBP), the papers act as a response from the ICC when various banks are applying unilateral and incorrect interpretations to certain articles and clarifying the proper interpretation and application when it determines that there is a need to do so, furthermore, to share practical views and guidance from experts in the management of trade finance transactions when exceptional events and issues arise for example this exceptional period because of the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”).
UCP rules revised six times since the first publication in 1933, the period between each revision range from 9 to 14 years, on 15th June 2017 ICC Executive Committee released a document NO.470/1272 to announce their decision after the voting that held with National Committee Forum in Rome on 8th November 2016 and on 23rd November 2016 in Paris in respect of a revision of UCP 600, the results were that the majority of National Committees preferred not to proceed with a revision, despite there were a few counter-views and comments were given supporting a UCP revision.
It is not considered, at this stage, to be appropriate to revise UCP 600 as the most of the problems lay not with the rules themselves, but with the application, i.e. practice of the rules (“international standard banking practice”).
50% of the problems apply to the presented documents: it is a justifiable assumption that a greater understanding of ISBP 745 would help alleviate these problems and greatly reduce this percentage, the remaining 50%, it is difficult to see how a revision of UCP would make much of a material difference as many of these causes are outside the scope of correction by the beneficiary.
The majority of problems are caused by:
Only seven items were identified for possible inclusion in a revision of UCP and most of these were already an integral part of ISBP 745. No new problems were raised which would prove that existing rules are wrong or that there is a gap.
The ICC Executive Committee Decision is greater understanding of practices should be the way forward, rather than a revision of the rules and this will be achieved by the implementation of a three-prong facilitation approach:
The following recommendations should be considered which could potentially reduce discrepancy ratios under documentary credits, as the rates of non-compliance are quite high, specifically on the first presentation.
As mentioned above the ICC executive committee stated they won’t revise UCP 600 anytime soon, on the other hand, it also states there are issues identified for possible inclusion in a revision of UCP. Several issues highlighted by trade finance experts for example:
A few of these issues outlined below:
The Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (UCP) Supplement for Electronic Presentations (“eUCP”) first published in 2002 as version 1.0 supplemented UCP 500, later updated as version 1.1 in 2007 to accompany the publication of UCP 600 and to bring it in line with the changes in terminology in UCP 600 and recently as version 2.0 in 2019 in order to accommodate current practice, technological developments and the continuing evolution toward electronic presentation. The rules were intentionally developed with version numbers in order to be updated regularly when required according to future technological developments that emerge in trade finance and without impacting upon other existing ICC rules.
Olivier Paul, ICC Director for Finance Development said: “The digitalisation of trade is becoming more and more a reality. By releasing the new eRules, ICC is taking another step in the right direction to ensure that our rules are adapted to new realities,”
David Meynell, Co-Chair of the Working Group and Owner, TradeLC Advisory said: “Extending the mitigation of risk from a paper environment to the electronic milieu safeguards the applicability of ICC rules whilst guaranteeing relevance in a constantly evolving digital trade world.”
By acknowledging the importance of the eRules, the ICC has made the full text of the eUCP available online for the use of trade finance practitioners everywhere. ICC has also published an article-by-article analysis of eUCP V2.0 and eURC V1.0 to guide banks on the new rules.
It is worth mentioning that, the eUCP doesn’t address or define the method that is necessary to facilitate electronic presentation, these are left to the parties to agree on the platform or the system to be used.
The contents of eUCP V2.0
It comprises of 14 articles, in order to avoid confusion between the articles of UCP and the eUCP the articles are numbered with an ‘e’ preceding each article number as the following:
At the end of 2010 Bolero announced the first electronic presentation using the Bolero platform to perform fully electronic presentation of documents under a documentary Credit issued subject to eUCP.
The electronic documents sent via Bolero platform by the beneficiary to RBS for pre-checking then as a formal ePresentation, after approval the documents forwarded to KEB and promptly honoured.
Arthur Vonchek, CEO of Bolero said: “We are very excited about the success of the live pilot which demonstrates both the reality as well as the substantial opportunities associated with straight through document presentation.”
Mr. Yutaka Kuge, General Manager, from “K” Line Pte Ltd. said: “Electronic BOL’s provide significant benefits to all parties in the supply chain. For ship-owners specifically, the most notable advantages are a fully traceable audit trail of BOL ownership and faster turnaround of administrative processes around BOL’s by elimination of physical BOL’s getting delayed or even lost during the transfer between the various parties.”
The ePresentation replaces the need for paper documentation, thereby saving the time for all parties involved, while accelerating the working capital cycle through faster and secure payment.