Letter of Credit Forum

My view is that the "guidance" given under para.11 of ISBP has to viewed in context, and the words "by itself" suggests for this approach to be taken.

Para. 9 is a general concept which is to be applied to any document presented under the LC, but the context is important.

So, for example, an Invoice may contain partially typed (perhaps in different typefaces) information, along with handwritten information. However, in this context the handwritten elements are not necessarily to be construed as an addition/alteration which would otherwise require authentication, especially it is evident that the contents could only have been inserted by a single issuer, namely the beneficiay.

I am not aware of the content of the handwriting element on the B/L example, and would need to view this to give a more considered view. However, with a B/L, with details beng completed by the forwarder/carrier's agent, para. 9 would take precedence. Here it is expected that the document would have been fully typed, and any handwritten additions is likely to cast doubt as to which party was responsible for the addition, i.e whether, consignor/carrier/agent. Therefore, in this case, any evident addition (or handwritten text) ought to be authenticated by the issuer of the document (duly identified), or its appointed agent.