DCW Monthly: April 2026
The ICC Banking Commission decided not to revise UCP 600 or ISBP 821. The argument: the rules are fine, what&
The ICC Banking Commission decided not to revise UCP 600 or ISBP 821. The argument: the rules are fine, what&
There will be no revision of the UCP 600 rules undertaken by the ICC Banking Commission at this time. Additionally,
Billed as a deliberate shift from rule revision to rule optimisation, the ICC Banking Commission’s 2026-2027 Action Plan – UCP/
A recent decision issued by a New York court demonstrates the importance of proper understanding and use of the SWIFT messaging system.
In Heineken Beverages International (PTY) Ltd. v. Soleil Chartered Bank, Heineken Beverages, as beneficiary of an ISP98 standby LC, brought a complaint in New York state court for nonpayment of the standby against issuer, Soleil Chartered Bank.
Issuer moved to dismiss the complaint solely on the ground that the standby was subject to exclusive jurisdiction in France, based on the letters “FR” appearing in Field 44J in a SWIFT message.
There will be no revision of the UCP 600 rules undertaken by the ICC Banking Commission at this time. Additionally,
Billed as a deliberate shift from rule revision to rule optimisation, the ICC Banking Commission’s 2026-2027 Action Plan – UCP/
The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court decision in UniCredit Bank GmbH v. Celestial Aviation Services Ltd.[[1]] was issued 25
In White Rock Insurance (SAC) Ltd. v. China Construction Bank Corp., the New York State Supreme Court denied China Construction
Gain full access to analysis, cases, eBooks and more with a DCW Free Trial