2011SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Documentary Compliance in Letter of Credit Law: What’s in a Name, and What Need for an Original?

John F. Dolan

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This article analyzes a moderately complex documentary compliance case that involved the misnaming of the beneficiary on various documents and the failure to present the original of the letter of credit. The piece concludes that courts must not impose factual inquiry duties on credit issuers who should be able to dishonor when the beneficiary’s name on documents varies the name in the credit itself and should not be required to take bonds or other security when the beneficiary fails to present the original of the credit as the letter of credit requires.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article analyzes a moderately complex documentary compliance case that involved the misnaming of the beneficiary on various documents and the failure to present the original of the letter of credit. The piece concludes that courts must not impose factual inquiry duties on credit issuers who should be able to dishonor when the beneficiary’s name on documents varies the name in the credit itself and should not be required to take bonds or other security when the beneficiary fails to present the original of the credit as the letter of credit requires.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article analyzes a moderately complex documentary compliance case that involved the misnaming of the beneficiary on various documents and the failure to present the original of the letter of credit. The piece concludes that courts must not impose factual inquiry duties on credit issuers who should be able to dishonor when the beneficiary’s name on documents varies the name in the credit itself and should not be required to take bonds or other security when the beneficiary fails to present the original of the credit as the letter of credit requires.

Key concepts: Beneficiary, Letter of credit, Issuer, Compliance (psychology), Business, Actuarial science, Law, Law and economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Documentary Compliance in Letter of Credit Law: What’s in a Name, and What Need for an Original? — Research Paper | ScholarLens