"The name of the carrier is stated on its face and signed or otherwise authenticated by:

──The carrier or as the named agent or representative of the carrier, or

──Any signature or certification by the master or as the named agent or agent of the master, the carrier or the general manager must indicate the identity of the "carrier" or "master", and the agent represents the carrier or master When signing or authenticating, the name and identity of the principal must also be indicated, that is, it must be indicated that the agent is signing or authenticating on behalf of the carrier or the captain. ”

In short, the bill of lading must be simplified. Two things need to be done:

First, the name of the carrier must be indicated;

Second, the identity of the signatory (whether the carrier, agent or captain) must be indicated. In practice, due to the introduction of the competition mechanism in the transportation industry, many large and small shipping companies have emerged, and the bills of lading they provide to the exporting party’s beneficiaries are also diverse. Except for a few shipping companies, they still use the old format of the bill of lading without indicating In addition to the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory, most of the identities on the bill of lading are irregular or unclear, making them the "primary culprit" of bill of lading dishonor in recent years. There are many ways to express the carrier name that are not standardized or unclear. The most common one is "ABC Shipping & 127; CoAs Agent For The Carrier Named Above" (ABC Shipping Company is the agent of the above carrier). amp;127;This way of expression is often used by shipping companies (mostly in China) for the convenience of operation,amp;127;The words "For &127;The &127;CarrierNamed Above" will not be left behind,amp;127; ; can appear on the bill of lading at the same time. amp; 127; According to the meaning of the word, the name of the carrier "indicates"──Named Above, who is it? amp; 127; The shipping company believes that this expression is in compliance with UCP500, which states that the bill of lading must indicate the name of the carrier. regulations. However, in practice, the issuing banks in different countries have the same reasons for refusing payment: "Bill of Lading & 127; not & 127; named the Carrier" (the bill of lading does not indicate the name of the carrier), & 127; quite a few. The import and export company was refused payment by the issuing bank only because of such a bill of lading and not for other reasons. The author believes that the issuing bank refused payment based on this alone, which is a bit picky, but it is not unreasonable. It would be too vague to use "Named Above" to describe the carrier on the bill of lading. Where is "Above" located on the bill of lading? 1 centimeter above or 10 centimeters above? 127; There are many terms printed on the bill of lading. Which one is the correct one? Is that what Above is referring to? What’s more, although foreign issuing banks review documents according to international practice, they may not necessarily think like some people do. Therefore, what should be clearly stated must be clearly stated. If the carrier is "M", it must be clearly stated. "M" must not be taken for granted.

A common reason why the identity of the signer on the bill of lading is not clear is that the format printed on the bill of lading is inconsistent with the later stamped or printed form of the shipping company, which makes the signature unclear. The person is unidentified.

amp; 127; amp; 127; amp; 127; amp; 127; amp; 127; amp; 127; If the format printed on the bill of lading is "As Carrier" (carrier) or "MASTER" (captain), amp; 127 ;According to this format, it must be signed by the carrier or the captain, but many bills of lading are later stamped or printed, showing "On behalf of ABC" (amp; 127; on behalf of ABC), "As Agent For the Carrier amp; 127; DEF amp; 127;" (amp; 127; as the agent of the DEF carrier), etc. This makes people confused. It is unclear what the identity of the signer on the bill of lading is, whether it is the agent, the captain or the Carrier? There are many issuing banks that refuse payment of bills of lading like this, and the reason is "B/Lnot clearly indicate the signatures"s capactiy" (the bill of lading does not clearly indicate the identity of the signatory) In fact, this kind of refusal is easy to avoid. The bill of lading only needs to show the true identity of the signer, erase other contradictory "identities" and stamp it with the shipping company's correction stamp.

In addition, , Common bill of lading refusals are also manifested in air waybills (AirwayBill) and land transport receipts (Cargo Receipt), which do not indicate the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory. Many people believe that air waybills and land transport receipts do not indicate the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory. Cargo shipping receipts are not documents of property rights, so they do not need such strict requirements. They still use the old format before the implementation of UCP500, and do not show the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory. Some issuing banks, such as banks in Japan and other countries, also default to this. However, this "default" is not the court's "precedent" or international practice. It is just some banks taking into account the actual situation (amp; 127; such as the applicant for issuing the certificate has already taken delivery of the goods, etc.) or temporary "interest". The relevant provisions of UCP500&127 still clearly require that this type of bill of lading must also indicate the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory. Therefore, some banks in Hong Kong and other places still make no exception for this type of bill of lading, stating that "the name and signature of the carrier are not indicated." It is well-founded to refuse payment on the grounds of "identity of the person".

Of course, the issuing bank's refusal to pay because the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory on the bill of lading are unclear is not "substantial" Not all issuing banks will refuse payment in this case. It is precisely this point that the exporter’s beneficiary, shipping company, etc. either maintain a good relationship with the customer, or are lucky, and do not pay enough attention; Some salesmen use the excuse that this type of bill of lading has "never been refused payment before" and ignore the suggestion of the negotiating bank at the export place to provide a bill of lading that complies with international practices, leaving them with no regrets about the subsequent refusal of payment by the issuing bank. On the bill of lading, indicate the name of the carrier and the identity of the signatory. For some companies, it can be said to be a "little effort". In today's fierce competition in foreign trade business, I think no one wants to be troubled by such "minutiae" on the bill of lading. "The parties are afraid that the "small trouble" of changing the order will make the possibility of the issuing bank's refusal to pay in the future a reality and lead to "big trouble".