Since a draft was included in the presentation at issue in ICC Opinion TA.948, it prompts important questions about examination not only under UCP but also under bills of exchange law.
On appeal, Court considered whether trial court: erred in holding that Subcontractor/Applicant was contractually precluded from relying on the unconscionability exception; correctly held that Contractor/Beneficiary’s demand was not fraudulent; and erred in declining to discharge the injunction.