| |
Question: |
Name: VV Won
I have a question from following case.
L/C called for shipment:
- from airport of departure: London
- to airport of destination: Hong Kong
Document required:
Airwaybill ...........
A forwarder's air waybill was presented to issuing
bank, and indicated airport of departure as "London" and airport of
destination as "Hong Kong".
According to ISBP rule no. 141, the air transport
document must indicate the airport of departure and airport of destination.
It also mentions an example, i.e., LHR/London Heathrow, which represents the
name of airport should be indicated on air waybill.
Now, the forwarder air waybill submitted indicates
"London" and "Hong Kong", instead of actual names of airports. Are they
violated the ISBP rules no. 141 and 142?
Thank you in advance!
VV |
| |
Answer
(from T.O. Lee) |
As far as UCP 600 is concerned, the AWB states what is
stated in the DC, "London & Hong Kong". It complies.
Having said that, going outside the UCP 600 box,
there may be a problem in large cities like London, New York and Paris where
there is more than one commercial (not military) airport in the same city.
The IATA code for each airport in the same city is different and hence
specifies the airport of departure or destination as the case may be. So if
a general airport description is used, the carrier may have a chance to
carry the cargoes to the wrong airport in the same city. Why? Simply because
the Murphy's Law is always applicable whether being incorporated in the
contracts or not.
As air transport is fully computerized, the
carrier's computer may only accept IATA codes, not general description of
airports, and this may delay the transport as the operator has to find out
which airport the shipper indents to ship the cargoes from or to.
I have suggested ICC Banking Commission to accept
BIMCO codes for charter party bill of lading but my suggestion is not
accepted. I am sure very soon queries like this one will surface in charter
party bills of lading.
Best regards,
T. O.
|
