Blog

Articles by Month

ICC Final Opinions January 2026

27/01/2026 Approved at the ICC Banking Commission meeting on 27 January 2026.

TA.958
The query examined whether a bill of lading that states both "freight prepaid" and "freight payable at D" is compliant with a documentary credit expressly requiring the bill of lading to be marked "freight prepaid." The confirming bank treated the wording as contradictory, arguing that a reference to freight being "payable" at a particular place undermined the prepaid status. The presenting bank contended that the additional wording merely identified a location for the carrier's internal settlement and did not indicate that freight remained outstanding.

In commercial shipping practice, the expressions serve different functions: "freight prepaid" describes the status of the freight charges as having been settled, while "payable at [place]" identifies the carrier's accounting or settlement location. The bill of lading contained no wording such as "freight collect," "due at destination," or any indication that payment was to be made by the consignee.

The opinion further clarified that UCP 600 sub-article 14 (e) was not relevant, as it concerns the description of goods, not freight terms. Importantly, the issue had already been addressed in ICC Official Opinion R691 / TA604rev, which confirmed that the combination of "freight prepaid" and "freight payable at [place]" on the same transport document is not inconsistent and does not constitute a valid discrepancy.

Applying the same reasoning, the presented bill of lading complied with the credit. The reference to "payable at D" was considered additional, non-conflicting information that did not negate the prepaid status of the freight. Accordingly, the refusal by the confirming bank was not justified.

Concluding, the discrepancy was not valid. A bill of lading stating "freight prepaid - payable at D" does not conflict with a credit requiring "freight prepaid", and is compliant under international standard banking practice unless the context clearly indicates that freight remains unpaid, which was not the case here.

www.tradefinance.training

Back to recent articles