Abstract
In the case of a letter of credit (L/C) dispute between the beneficiary and the issuing bank, it is a common defense strategy for the issuing bank to refuse to make the payment under the L/C on the grounds.
Collegial Bench for the Second Instance: Xiaoli Gao, Ying Liang and Shuo Wang
Edited by Ming Li; translated by Zuoyong Liu
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
R. D. Harbottle (Mereantile) Ltd. v. National Westminister Bank Ltd. (1978) QB 146, p. 269.
- 2.
Official Comment 1, reprinted in McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 621/2, UCC 5–108, at 367.
- 3.
Equitable Trust Company of New York v. Dawson Partners Ltd. (1927) 27 Lloyd’s L Rep 49 (HL).
- 4.
参见林建煌: 《品读UCP600跟单信用证统一惯例》, 厦门大学出版社2008年版, 第210页。
- 5.
Boris Kozolchyk, “Strict Compliance and the Reasonable Document Checker”, Brooklyn Law Review (56), 1990, p.48.
- 6.
参见高晓力: 《信用证审单标准问题研究》, 载《人民司法》2002年第4期, 第36页。
- 7.
参见徐冬根: 《银行信用证审单标准的法哲学思考: 精确性、模糊性还是原则性》, 载《现代法学》2004年第5期。
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Law Press China
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zhang, B. (2022). DBS Bank Singapore v. Wuxi Humei Thermal Power Engineering Co., Ltd.. In: Selected Cases from the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China. Library of Selected Cases from the Chinese Court. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8410-4_36
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8410-4_36
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-8409-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-8410-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)