Answered step by step
Verified Expert Solution
Link Copied!

Question

1 Approved Answer

On 2nd January 2019 Solar Toys Australia (STA) contracted to sell to Taipei Toys (TT), a children's toy store in the city of Taipei, Taiwan,

On 2nd January 2019 Solar Toys Australia (STA) contracted to sell to Taipei Toys (TT), a children's toy store in the city of Taipei, Taiwan, 250 solar-powered walking crocodile toys. The price was AUD 5,000 for delivery FOB Sydney. Since TT was a first-time customer, payment would be by letter of credit.

On 9 January, STA received advice from Austral Bank that China Bank in Taiwan had issued a letter of credit in favour of STA as beneficiary. The letter of credit was payable upon presentation of the beneficiary's bill of exchange drawn on China Bank together with the following documents:

  • Commercial Invoice;
  • Full set of clean on board negotiable marine bills of lading consigned to order blank endorsed marked freight pre-paid;
  • Certificate of origin signed by Australian Customs or its authorized agency;
  • Packing list in duplicate.

Austral bank has been authorized to act as advising and negotiating bank.

On 10th January 2019, the goods were loaded on board the ship and a clean bill of lading was issued. The shipping documents together with a bill of exchange drawn on China Bank were presented to Austral Bank on 14th January. On 20th January, Austral Bank indicated that it refused to pay because the documents presented did not conform to the requirements of the letter of credit.

It appears that the problem with the documents is that the bill of lading presented by STA is marked "Freight Collect" instead of "Freight Prepaid" as required under the terms of the letter of credit. In addition, the certificate of origin presented by the beneficiary is signed by an officer of "Aussie Inspections" without any indication that "Aussie Inspections" has any authority from Australian Customs.

When Austral Bank contacted China Bank to request a waiver of the discrepancies, China Bank refused. The reason for the refusal soon became clear - senior executives within TT had absconded with nearly all of the firm's liquid assets, and the firm had been placed in liquidation.

Required:

what are STA's rights, if any, in relation to Austral Bank and China Bank and TT?

Step by Step Solution

There are 3 Steps involved in it

Step: 1

blur-text-image

Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions

See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success

Step: 2

blur-text-image_2

Step: 3

blur-text-image_3

Ace Your Homework with AI

Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance

Get Started

Recommended Textbook for

Public Law

Authors: Mark Elliott, Robert Thomas

4th Edition

0198836740, 978-0198836742

More Books

Students also viewed these Law questions

Question

=+b) Create a p chart for these samples.

Answered: 1 week ago

Question

What is the use of bootstrap program?

Answered: 1 week ago