DCW Monthly: September 2026
This month's content returns to a question the rules answer clearly and the courts sometimes do not: who
An LC's independence from the underlying transaction it supports is one of the core tenets that distinguishes this instrument type from other promises. When disputes arise, courts at times have given uneven treatment to independent undertakings with regard to the independence principle.
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.
Amr KAMAL explores integrating ICC's URDG758 into Egypt's commercial law for demand guarantees, emphasizing the advanced nature of Egyptian law in recognizing demand and suretyship guarantees, drawing comparisons with global practices.
In Wellington Cantonment Board v. Gharpure Engineering & Constructions, the Madras High Court (India) set aside a District Judge order
In AXA v. Chiu Teng, Singapore’s top court confirms liability under a performance bond absent a prior ruling or admission of breach. The case highlights the importance of precise drafting and reinforces the binding nature of bond terms over labels like “guarantee” or “on-demand.”
Gain full access to analysis, cases, eBooks and more with a DCW Free Trial