ISBP 745 A2: Virgules and Commas Are Not Word Substitutes

Introduction

The illusion is that a slash is an “and,” that a comma list is one frozen string, and that Field 45A or a port line written as “Red/Black/Blue” or “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp” must be copied as a mirror image onto every stipulated document. Examiners refuse a bill of lading showing only Hamburg because the credit listed three ports. Examiners refuse an invoice showing only Red because the credit used virgules. Examiners honour a presentation that ships all three ports on three vessels when the credit prohibited partial shipment, because they compiled A2(b)’s combination limb without reading the example’s condition. Each result is a binary failure mode. ISBP 745 A2 states that virgules (slash marks “/”) and commas used as a range of data in a credit may result in different meanings and should not be used as a substitute for a word. If, nevertheless, they are used and no context is apparent, this will allow the use of one or more of the options. The ICC’s own examples are the operands. Mutating a virgule into a conjunction, or mutating a comma list into an identity test, violates A2. The error is systemic.

Failure Mode Analysis

Failure Mode 1: Virgule Compiled as Conjunction

The credit states “Red/Black/Blue” with no further clarification. The invoice and the packing data show Red. The examiner refuses because Black and Blue do not appear, compiling the virgule as “and.”

A2(a) states that if a virgule is used and no context is apparent, this will allow the use of one or more of the options, and that “Red/Black/Blue” means only Red or only Black or only Blue or any combination of them. Honour of only Red is the architecture. Refusal of only Red mutates the virgule into a conjunction the ICC text does not write. Article 14(d) does not require identity with the slash string. Article 5 does not authorise a call to the warehouse to count colours.

Deterministic resolution: Read the credit face. If no context is apparent, compile the option set. Test the documents against that set. Only Red is inside the set. Truncate the “all three required” discrepancy.

Failure Mode 2: Comma List Compiled as a Single Identical String

The credit allows partial shipment and indicates port of loading as “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp” with no further clarification. The bill of lading indicates shipment from Hamburg on a named vessel, with an on board notation. The examiner refuses because the bill of lading does not recite “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp.”

A2(b) states that this credit language means only Hamburg or only Rotterdam or only Antwerp or any combination of them. Article 20(a) ii. and iii. test the port of loading stated in the credit. After A2 compiles the statement, Hamburg is a stated port. Refusing a Hamburg bill of lading violates A2(b) and misreads Article 20(a). Do not examine that bill of lading under Article 18(c). Do not examine the invoice under Article 20(a).

Deterministic resolution: Compile A2(b) first. Then apply Article 20(a) to the bill of lading against the compiled port. If Hamburg is in the set, the identity miss on the comma string is not a discrepancy. Isolate Article 20(a) from A2’s drafting warning.

Failure Mode 3: Combination Limb Fired Against a Partial-Shipment Prohibition, or Context Invented From the Contract

The credit prohibits partial shipment and lists “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp.” The presentation contains two sets of transport documents evidencing shipment on more than one means of conveyance, Hamburg and Rotterdam. The examiner honours, citing A2(b)’s “any combination of them.” Or the credit is silent on partial shipment, the documents show only Hamburg, and the examiner refuses because the applicant’s contract required all three ports.

A2(b)’s combination example is conditioned on a credit that allows partial shipment. Article 31(a) allows partial drawings or shipments as default. A prohibition in the credit truncates that default. Combination of ports on more than one means of conveyance is Article 31(b)’s partial-shipment architecture: a presentation consisting of one or more sets of transport documents evidencing shipment on more than one means of conveyance within the same mode of transport will be regarded as covering a partial shipment, even if the means of conveyance leave on the same day for the same destination. Honouring that presentation against a prohibition mutates A2(b). Refusing a single-port Hamburg shipment because the contract wanted three ports violates Article 4(a) and Article 5. Context for A2 is apparent on the credit, or it is not. The contract is not the credit.

Deterministic resolution: Isolate A2(b)’s single-option limbs from its combination limb. Apply Article 31(a) to whether partial shipment is allowed, and Article 31(b) to whether more than one means of conveyance is a partial shipment. Do not compile the sale contract as A2 context. If the credit itself supplies further clarification, the option permission is off. If it does not, the option permission is on.

Deterministic Resolution Architecture

1. Locate the virgule or comma on the credit, not on a guess about the goods. A2 compiles credit language. It does not inspect cartons. Article 14(a) and Article 5 confine the test to documents.

2. Ask whether context is apparent on the credit. If the credit itself clarifies the slash or the comma list, A2’s “one or more of the options” permission does not fire. If no context is apparent, compile the option set.

3. Compile A2(a) for virgules. “Red/Black/Blue” with no further clarification means only Red or only Black or only Blue or any combination of them. Truncate any discrepancy that the document failed to reprint the slash string.

4. Compile A2(b) for comma ranges. Ports of loading or discharge or countries of origin written with commas, with no further clarification, allow one or more of the options. Apply the combination limb only when the credit allows partial shipment, as in the ICC example, read with Article 31(a).

5. Decouple A2 from Article 20(a), Article 18(c) and Article 28. After the option set exists, examine the bill of lading under Article 20(a) for carrier, shipped on board, named vessel, and port of loading. Examine the invoice under Article 18(c). Examine insurance under Article 28 and ISBP 745 Section K. Do not examine a bill of lading under A2 as if A2 were Section E. Do not examine an invoice under Article 20(a).

6. Apply Article 14(d) as conflict, not identity. Data need not be identical to the virgule or comma string. Data must not conflict with the compiled option set. A colour, port, or origin outside the set is a conflict. A single option inside the set is not a conflict.

7. Do not import the sale contract. Article 4(a). Apparent context is credit context. Inventing context from the applicant’s purchase order mutates A2.

8. Honour or refuse on the actual gate. If the documents use an option inside the set and otherwise comply, Article 15(a) requires honour. If they use data outside the set, Article 16(c) requires a single notice listing that conflict. Do not list “not identical to the slash string.”

Conclusion

ISBP 745 A2 is the credit-drafting architecture for virgules and commas. Those marks should not be used as a substitute for a word. If they are used and no context is apparent, one or more of the listed options may be used. “Red/Black/Blue” is not an “and.” “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp,” when partial shipment is allowed and no further clarification is given, is not a single string that every transport document must reprint. Article 14(d) tests conflict against the compiled option set, not identity with the punctuation. Article 20(a) then tests the bill of lading against the compiled port of loading. Article 31(a) isolates the combination limb from a partial-shipment prohibition. Examiners who refuse a single option violate A2. Examiners who honour a combination against a prohibition mutate A2(b)’s example. The result is deterministic.

FAQ

Q1: The credit states “Red/Black/Blue” with no further clarification. The invoice describes the goods as Red. Is that a discrepancy because Black and Blue are missing?

No. ISBP 745 A2(a) states that if a virgule is used and no context is apparent, this will allow the use of one or more of the options, and that “Red/Black/Blue” means only Red or only Black or only Blue or any combination of them. Only Red is inside that set. UCP 600 Article 14(d) states that data need not be identical to, but must not conflict with, data in the credit.

Q2: The credit allows partial shipment and indicates port of loading as “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp” with no further clarification. The bill of lading shows shipment from Hamburg. Must the bill of lading reprint all three ports?

No. ISBP 745 A2(b) states that this language means only Hamburg or only Rotterdam or only Antwerp or any combination of them. UCP 600 Article 20(a) iii. requires the bill of lading to indicate shipment from the port of loading stated in the credit. After A2 compiles that statement, Hamburg is a stated port. Do not examine the bill of lading under Article 18(c).

Q3: The credit prohibits partial shipment and lists “Hamburg, Rotterdam, Antwerp.” Two bills of lading show Hamburg and Rotterdam on two vessels. Does A2(b) force honour?

No. A2(b)’s combination example is written for a credit that allows partial shipment. UCP 600 Article 31(a) states that partial drawings or shipments are allowed, which a credit may exclude. Article 31(b) states that shipment on more than one means of conveyance within the same mode of transport will be regarded as covering a partial shipment. A2 does not delete that prohibition.

Q4: The applicant says the contract required all three colours. The credit states “Red/Black/Blue” with no further clarification. May the bank refuse only-Red documents on the strength of the contract?

No. UCP 600 Article 4(a) states that a credit is a separate transaction from the sale or other contract, and that banks are in no way concerned with or bound by such contract. UCP 600 Article 5 states that banks deal with documents and not with goods. A2’s context is apparent on the credit, or it is not. The contract is not that context.

Q5: The credit states “Hamburg / Rotterdam” as port of loading and also states “shipment from Hamburg only.” Is a Rotterdam bill of lading acceptable under A2(a)?

No. A2(a) and A2(b) fire when no context is apparent. “Shipment from Hamburg only” is further clarification on the credit. The option permission is truncated. UCP 600 Article 20(a) iii. then tests the bill of lading against Hamburg as the port of loading stated in the credit. Rotterdam conflicts.