Responding to “A Critical Review of ICC Opinion TA.948”

Writing in a personal capacity as a professional deeply familiar with the ICC Opinion process and the trade finance business, Dave Meynell offers response to three remarks made by Rupnarayan Bose in a June 2025 DCW article on ICC Opinion TA.948.  

Responding to “A Critical Review of ICC Opinion TA.948”
Editors Note
The article below addresses issues raised by Rupnarayan Bose in his June 2025 article, A Critical Review of ICC Opinion TA.948. In that piece, Mr. Bose questioned the ICC’s interpretation of endorsement requirements under UCP 600 and the legal status of international standard banking practice. This response offers a clarification of the ICC’s position and the rationale underpinning its Opinion.

TA948 - clarification on the endorsement of drafts under documentary credits subject to UCP 600

Neither the issuing bank nor the Banking Commission appear to have clear understanding why or when a draft needs to be endorsed.” – Rupnarayan Bose

Feedback received from ICC National Committees overwhelmingly supports the view that, in the circumstances presented in ICC Opinion TA948 (2024), the endorsement of a draft by the beneficiary does not represent international standard banking practice under documentary credits. This position is broadly endorsed across regions, including strong consensus among National Committees in Asia.

Great! You’ve successfully signed up.

Welcome back! You've successfully signed in.

You've successfully subscribed to Documentary Credit World.

Success! Check your email for magic link to sign-in.

Success! Your billing info has been updated.

Your billing was not updated.