FCL -v- CY – a great wrong was done!
The Annual
Banking Commission Meeting is over! I am now back home – and the 12 hours
flight allowed me to do some reflections.
I will
share those over the coming week – especially once the final approved ICC Opinions
are out. There is however one issue that is burning.
Somehow I
think a great wrong was done yesterday – and I hope that it can still be fixed.
I refer to
Draft ICC Opinion TA817 – which I previously discussed at the blog post “(FCL)
For CLarification (please)” (http://lcviews.com/index.php?page_id427).
Please find the details of the query via that link.
This Draft
Opinion was subject to a heated discussion – and the conclusion was that the Conclusion
from the Draft Opinions stays – although with some changes to the Analysis.
Of course I
do not agree with that – but I am fine with that – respect fully that views can
differ.
However
during the discussion so many simply wrong statements were made, which have
made me realise that it simply is wrong to draft the final Conclusion based on
that discussion.
It is
simply NEEDED that someone is consulted that knows something about this. Let me
offer some example of the wrong statements that was made (of course not linking
it to any person):
1: Reference
was made to the fact that since the bill of lading does not state “FCL” (Full
Container Load) but “only” CY/CY it may in fact be an LCL (Less than Container
Load) shipment.
This simply
is wrong. When the bill of lading states “CY/CY” it means that the full sealed
container is deliver to the container yard of the shipping line at the port of
loading – and will be release to the consignee – sealed – as one container to
the consignee at the port of discharge.
An LCL
shipmen is one where the goods (not in container) is delivered to the container
freight station – and the container is packed and sealed by the shipping line.
This will normally include goods from different shippers.
At the port
of discharge the container is stripped by the shipping line, and goods are released
to the individual consignees.
In such
case the bill of lading would include the statement “LCL/LCL” or “CFS/CFS”.
2: It was
stated that if the container is shipped as FCL – it may not yet have been
delivered to the CY (Container Yard).
For the
case at hand, the bill of lading has been presented under the LC – showing that
the container is “shipped on board” a named vessel. This means that the
container is on board the vessel. In order to come to the vessel it must first have
been delivered to the CY – Container Yard.
3: It was
also said that the bill of lading must state FCL because otherwise one does not
know that it is a full container; i.e. there could be 10-15 cbm empty space in
the container.
As such
this statement express ignorance as to what FCL actually means. It does NOT
mean that the container is 100% full; and I guess that can only happen if it is
loaded with sand or similar. FCL means that a container has been booked (rather
than space in the container). I.e. the shipper to is deliver the container to
the shiping line – sealed. In my days as freight forwarder I once shipped an
FCL container that only container 4 CBM. The maximum space in a 20’ container
is approx. 30 CBM. The reason was that for that particular destination at that
time – this was the cheapest!
In other
words – I strongly think that this discussion is not suited to make a final decision
on the basis of! Therefore I highly recommend that the ICC Banking Commission
find one or two sources to consult in this matter. And if so I urge that they
find peoples that have some practical experience. I.e. not just lawyers – with
only theoretical knowledge on the sucject matter.
Also I
think that it is vital to consider how this is asked; i.e. not asking about the
theoretical difference between FCL and CY; but to stick to the Query – and as
whether a container that includes the codes “CY/CY” is indeed an FCL container.
Message
hereby relayed ….
And with
this I only have left to wish you all a great weekend – and please take care of
each other and the LC.
Kind
regards
Kim