Question 1 I Pamediano UK Limited bought from Meprosa, an Indian Punjabi seller, 26000 tons of Basmati rice at US$125 per ton f.o.b. Mumbai ("F.O.B. Contract"). Meprosa planned on obtaining the Basmati rice from Narandra Gopal of Gujarat and accordingly entered into a contract for Gopal to supply him with the goods. The F.O.B. contract expresses the shipment period as "During April - 31 May 2019" and requires that "Buyers shall give no less than 15 business days' notice of readiness of vessel to load." The contract incorporated GAFTA Form No. 119 of January 2020. On Friday 17 May 2019, the last day for serving the requisite notice of readiness, Pamediano as buyers nominated MV Angelina Sunrise for the carriage of the Basmati rice and notified Meprosa by telex of the nomination. Unfortunately, Merrosa's telex machine was out of paper, with the result that Meprosa only sawa print out of the notice the next day, Saturday 18 May 2019. Nevertheless, on Monday 20 May 2019, Meprosa wrote to Pamediano rejecting the nomination as being out of time, and added that his suppliers, Narandra Gopal, has ceased business due to insurmountable financial difficulties. Pamediano responded that the suppliers' collapse was no concern of Pamediano, and that the rejection notice was invalid, null and void. At 10:15 hours on Monday 3 June 2019, Pamediano emailed Meprosa, stating that MV Rosemary Sunrise had encountered serious mechanical problems and replaced with The Eucxmedon Angeles, The email added: "We hereby extend the delivery period to 29 June 2019 pursuant to clause 9 of GRATA Form No. 119." The misspelling of GAFTA inadvertently escaped Pamediano's attention. The Eurymedon Angelos under a carriage arrangement with Pamediano got to Mumbai port on 27 June 2019 at 13 hours. The master notified Meprosa of the vessel's readiness to load goods; but explained that the ship could not possibly complete loading until after 5 July 2019. Meprosa ignored the notice. Despite the sad fate of Narandra Gopal, Meprosa could have procured the basmati rice from another supplier at the current market price, i.e. US$140 per ton. 4 After the vessel had waited for two weeks to no avail, the shipowner sailed away and claimed from Pamediano full freight as damages. 1 Advise the parties on their rights, obligations and liabilities under the f.o.b.contract. 1 Question 2 - This question consists of two parts. 1 (a) In internatiotal sales transactions, it is often unlawful for goods forming the subject of a contract between a buyer and the seller to be exported unless a licence has been obtained (Lord Denning MR in Czarnikow Ltd v Rolimpex (1978) QB-179 at 196). Discuss (b) Critically evaluate the buyer's obligation in f.o.b. sales contracts under English law with reference to any of the GAFTA forms you have studied, 1 Question 3.4 In Arnhold Karberg v Blyth Green (1915) 2 KB-379 at 388, Scrutton J. says he is "strongly of the opinion that the key to many of the difficulties arising in c.i.f. contracts-is to keep firmly in mind the cardinal distinction that a c.i.f. contract of sale is not a sale of goods, but a sale of documents relating to goods." Explore the correctness and limits of his Lordship's view with the aid of salient features of c.if. sales transactions you have studied. I Question 4" The seller's right to payment on a letter of credit continues to be a highly controversial topic. It has attracted different approaches in the English and Singapore courts and divided the academic community, including trade finance professionals. Discuss || 1 Question 1 I Pamediano UK Limited bought from Meprosa, an Indian Punjabi seller, 26000 tons of Basmati rice at US$125 per ton f.o.b. Mumbai ("F.O.B. Contract"). Meprosa planned on obtaining the Basmati rice from Narandra Gopal of Gujarat and accordingly entered into a contract for Gopal to supply him with the goods. The F.O.B. contract expresses the shipment period as "During April - 31 May 2019" and requires that "Buyers shall give no less than 15 business days' notice of readiness of vessel to load." The contract incorporated GAFTA Form No. 119 of January 2020. On Friday 17 May 2019, the last day for serving the requisite notice of readiness, Pamediano as buyers nominated MV Angelina Sunrise for the carriage of the Basmati rice and notified Meprosa by telex of the nomination. Unfortunately, Merrosa's telex machine was out of paper, with the result that Meprosa only sawa print out of the notice the next day, Saturday 18 May 2019. Nevertheless, on Monday 20 May 2019, Meprosa wrote to Pamediano rejecting the nomination as being out of time, and added that his suppliers, Narandra Gopal, has ceased business due to insurmountable financial difficulties. Pamediano responded that the suppliers' collapse was no concern of Pamediano, and that the rejection notice was invalid, null and void. At 10:15 hours on Monday 3 June 2019, Pamediano emailed Meprosa, stating that MV Rosemary Sunrise had encountered serious mechanical problems and replaced with The Eucxmedon Angeles, The email added: "We hereby extend the delivery period to 29 June 2019 pursuant to clause 9 of GRATA Form No. 119." The misspelling of GAFTA inadvertently escaped Pamediano's attention. The Eurymedon Angelos under a carriage arrangement with Pamediano got to Mumbai port on 27 June 2019 at 13 hours. The master notified Meprosa of the vessel's readiness to load goods; but explained that the ship could not possibly complete loading until after 5 July 2019. Meprosa ignored the notice. Despite the sad fate of Narandra Gopal, Meprosa could have procured the basmati rice from another supplier at the current market price, i.e. US$140 per ton. 4 After the vessel had waited for two weeks to no avail, the shipowner sailed away and claimed from Pamediano full freight as damages. 1 Advise the parties on their rights, obligations and liabilities under the f.o.b.contract. 1 Question 2 - This question consists of two parts. 1 (a) In internatiotal sales transactions, it is often unlawful for goods forming the subject of a contract between a buyer and the seller to be exported unless a licence has been obtained (Lord Denning MR in Czarnikow Ltd v Rolimpex (1978) QB-179 at 196). Discuss (b) Critically evaluate the buyer's obligation in f.o.b. sales contracts under English law with reference to any of the GAFTA forms you have studied, 1 Question 3.4 In Arnhold Karberg v Blyth Green (1915) 2 KB-379 at 388, Scrutton J. says he is "strongly of the opinion that the key to many of the difficulties arising in c.i.f. contracts-is to keep firmly in mind the cardinal distinction that a c.i.f. contract of sale is not a sale of goods, but a sale of documents relating to goods." Explore the correctness and limits of his Lordship's view with the aid of salient features of c.if. sales transactions you have studied. I Question 4" The seller's right to payment on a letter of credit continues to be a highly controversial topic. It has attracted different approaches in the English and Singapore courts and divided the academic community, including trade finance professionals. Discuss || 1