A recent ICC opinion, TA.843rev, addressed a situation whereby a nominated bank had been receiving refusal notices from an issuing bank, in respect of documents presented under various documentary credits, stating an apparent discrepancy: ‘photocopy of document presented instead of original'.
The nominated bank pointed out that the documents under discussion were created via an electronic platform that allowed the beneficiary to create documents online, generate a pdf file for download, and subsequently print the document for signature. In view of the fact that this process had converted the previous colour paper document to one now produced in black and white, the issuing bank were interpreting the electronically-produced document to be a photocopy.
As mentioned in the analysis to TA843rev, the documents had actually been presented in paper format and not by means of an electronic record. Therefore, UCP 600 article 17 applied in the determination of the originality of the document. The actual generation process for any document is not an issue with which banks are concerned. It is also not correct to use the colour of a document as a standard to measure compliance. Nowhere is it stated in UCP that printouts in black and white are to be treated as copies.
As we are all aware, it can be very difficult with modern technology to distinguish between a copy and an original. With this in mind, UCP 600 sub-articles 17 (b) and (c) outline that any document not appearing to be in accordance with the stated classifications is to be considered as a copy.
It was concluded that the presented document would not be discrepant provided that it could be determined that it was an original in accordance with article 17.