国贸实务-案例分析-Case-Studies

国贸实务-案例分析-Case-Studies

Case Studies of International Trade

Course: Practice of International Trade

Adviser: Gao Yanfeng

Grade&Class: Grade 2012 Class 5

Name: Li Yuanbao

Student ID: 120440502

Date: 20th December, 2014

Case Studies of International Trade

Name: Li Yuanbao Student ID: 120440502 Case 1 Quality of Goods

A Chinese exporter signed a sales contract with a European company to export five metric tons of Chinese dates. Both the contract and the L/C specified that the dates were of Grade 3. When preparing goods for shipment, the seller found that Grade 3 Chinese dates were out of stock. In order to make delivery in time, the seller shipped the Grade 2 Chinese dates to the buyer and indicated in the commercial invoice that the Grade 2 Chinese dates are priced as per Grade 3.

Do you think it is reasonable for the exporter to do so? What kind of risk is there for the seller?

译文：

一家中国出口商与一家欧洲出口商签订了一个合同，卖方向买方出口5公吨的红枣。合同与信用证上明确标注，卖方所提供的是三等的红枣。当准备货物装运时，卖方发现三等红枣的仓储存货不足。为了使货物按时到达，卖方将二等红枣配送到给买方，并在商务发票上注明二等红枣的价格与三等红枣一致。

你认为出口方这么做是否合理。卖方这样做有何风险？

Analysis on Case 1:

According to UCP500, Article 37, the description of goods in the commercial invoices must correspond with the description in the Credit. What the seller did is inconsistent with the stipulation of UCP. The buyer is entitled to reject the payment and the goods on the ground that the goods delivered are not what the contract and L/C require.

If the market changes or the price falls down, the buyer may take this excuse for rejecting the goods or claiming compensation from the seller, thought the goods delivered are better than those stipulated in the contract.

Case 2 Quantity of Goods

A Chinese export company exported 1 000 electric fans to a country in the Middle East. Both the contract and L/C stipulated that partial shipment was not allowed. When the fans were transported to the port for shipment, it was found that 40 fans were damaged and it was impossible to replace the defective fans because of the time for the shipment. The consignor thought that according to UCP500 5% more or less was allowed if the amount didn’t exceed the L/C amount and under-delivering 40 fans was still within 5%. In the end, 960 fans were delivered to the importer. When the seller surrendered the shipping documents to the bank for the negotiation of payment, he was rejected by the bank.

Was it reasonable for the bank to do so?

译文：一家中国出口公司向位于中东的一个国家出口1000 台电风扇。合同与信用证上都规定了不允许分批运装。当这批风扇被运送到港口进行装运的时候，发现有40台电风扇有损坏，但由于装运的时间限制，所以无法对残次的风扇进行更换。发货方认为，根据UCP 500 5%溢短装条款，如果货物（电风扇）的数量不超过信用证上的数量或者少于40台以内的数量，都是在5%的范围内的。最终，960台风扇被运送到了进口方。当卖方向银行提交船运文件以商讨款项支付时，银行拒绝了这一请求。

银行这么做合理吗？