REGULATION
OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
By
associate professor Giuditta Cordero Moss
Case 1[1]
The
Beneficiary of a Letter of Credit presents documents to obtain payment under
the Letter of Credit. The Bnak refuses payment, because not all the documents
listed in the instruction have been presented. In particular, a ”Receipt signed
and proving delivery of the goods” was listed as one of the documents to be
presented, and was not presented. The Beneficiary claims that payment is due in
spite of the lack of this documents, becuase the delivery can be proven by
other means. Is the Beneficiary entitled to obtain payment under the Letter of
Credit?
Case 2[2]
A
Letter of Credit is issued by the Philippine National Bank, as part of a
settlement netween the the—president of the Philippine Ferdinand Marcos and
Chuidan’s business. Shortly thereafter the government of President Marcos is
overthrown, and the new government instructs the Philippine National Bank not
to make payment under the Letter of Credit issued to Chuidan, on the gorund of
suspected fraudolent settlement. A
Case 3[3]
A Letter
of Credit is issued by an Ugandan bank. Citibank of New York acts as an
advising bank. In 1972 the Ugandan government prohibits the Ugandan bank from
making foreign exchange payment to the Israeli beneficiary. Consequently, the
issuing bank instructs the advising bank to cancel the Letter of Credit.The
Beneficiary claims payment under the Letter of Credit from Citibank. Is the
Beneficiary entitled to payment in accordane with the Letter of Credit?
Case 4[4]
DCA
has entered into a contract for the supply of certain military equipment to the
State of India, and has issued a Letter of Credit as a performance guarantee.
The main document to be presented to obtain payment under the Letter of Credit
is a certificate by the State of India stating that DCA is in breach of
contract. War breaks out between
[1] Société de Banque
Suisse v. Société Generale Alsacienne de Banque, Entscheidungen des schweizerischen
Bundesgerichts, 1989, II, 67.
[2] Chuidan v. Philippine
National Bank, 976
F.2.d 561 (9th Cir. 1992)
[3] J.Zeevi & Sons v.
Grindlsy’s Bank (
[4] Dynamics Corp. Of