《新编国际结算与案例(英文版)》是在我国国际贸易结算业务迅猛发展以及国际商会有关惯例重新修订的大背景下精心编写的,旨在为进出口企业工作人员、商业银行国际业务部门工作者、高等院校教师和学生以及广大外经贸战线人士提供一本时效性、实用性和针对性较强的学习和参考书籍。
本书使用英文编写,力求与国际商会最新出版物《跟单信用证统一惯例600号》和《托收统一规则522号》等国际惯例同步。本书紧紧结合当前国际商务实际,编写了6个章节的基本内容,并有选择性地论述了共计16个典型案例,其中,信用证案例l3个,托收案例2个,汇款案例1个,每一个案例均附有汉语注释和相关问题参考答案。另外,附件中的国际惯例均为中文版本。这样便于广大读者、教学者或学习者阅读、应用、理解与掌握。基于较长时间的实际应用,编者认为,本书至少适合于如下几个方面的学习、教学或参考目的之用:
1.进出口公司、商业银行等有关部门员工学习、参考和培训的用书;
2.高等院校国际贸易、国际金融、商务管理、商务英语等研究生、本专科专业有关《国际结算》全英或双语课程的辅助案例或读物;
3.国际MBA教师教学或学生学习的辅助性案例教材或参考书;
4.其他各种外向型企事业单位在职培训用书等。
《新编国际结算与案例(英文版)》是在我国国际贸易结算业务迅猛发展以及国际商会有关惯例重新修订的大背景下精心编写的,旨在为进出口企业工作人员、商业银行国际业务部门工作者、高等院校教师和学生以及广大外经贸战线人士提供一本时效性、实用性和针对性较强的学习和参考书籍。
本书使用英文编写,力求与国际商会最新出版物《跟单信用证统一惯例600号》和《托收统一规则522号》等国际惯例同步。本书紧紧结合当前国际商务实际,编写了6个章节的基本内容,并有选择性地论述了共计16个典型案例,其中,信用证案例13个,托收案例2个,汇款案例1个,每一个案例均附有汉语注释和相关问题参考答案。另外,附件中的国际惯例均为中文版本。这样便于广大读者、教学者或学习者阅读、应用、理解与掌握。基于较长时间的实际应用,编者认为,本书至少适合于如下几个方面的学习、教学或参考目的之用:
1.进出口公司、商业银行等有关部门员工学习、参考和培训的用书;
2.高等院校国际贸易、国际金融、商务管理、商务英语等研究生、本专科专业有关《国际结算》全英或双语课程的辅助案例或读物;
3.国际MBA教师教学或学生学习的辅助性案例教材或参考书;
4.其他各种外向型企事业单位在职培训用书等。
朱文忠 博士、教授、硕士生导师。河南大学外语系文学学士学位;英国南安普敦大学管理学院MBA硕士学位(Merit级);中山大学管理学院企业管理博士学位。1999年曾荣获英国政府“志奋领”奖学金。2002年前曾在中国工商银行工作十年,现任广东外语外贸大学国际商务英语学院副院长,兼任国际商务研究中心主任,国际经济贸易研究中心和粤商研究中心研究员,《国际经贸探索》核心期刊英文编辑,广东省企业社会责任研究会常务理事。具有复合型教师特色,全英或双语讲授《当代商业概论》、《商业银行管理》、《国际结算》、《MBA商业伦理》等课程,其中两门课程分别于2007年fD2008年被评为学校精品课程,一门课程2009年同时获评为广东省精品课程和国家双语教学示范课程。所申报国际商务(全英教学)专业2010年荣获大学特色专业称号。主要研究方向为企业管理和商务英语。近年发表论文60多篇,其中3篇被人大复印全文转载,1篇被《新华文摘》转载,出版专著2本、编著教材7本,其中1本为国家“十一五”规划教材,完成或在研各类科研项目7项,其中2项为广东省哲学社会科学“十一五”规划课题。
Part 1 Introduction to International Settlement
Chapter 1 Brief Introduction to Background Knowledge of International Settlement
Chapter 2 Basic Negotiable Instruments and Terms of International Settlement
Chapter 3 Remittance
Chapter 4 Documentary Collection
Chapter 5 Documentary Credit
Chapter 6 Financing Methods Related to International Settlement
Part 2 Case Studies of International Settlement
Chapter 1 Cases of L/C Based on UCP600
Case No. 1 The Case of the Unspecified Country of Origin..
Case No. 2 The Case of the Contingent Irrevocability of the Credit
Case No. 3 The Case of the Standby Credit and the Alleged Fraudulent Statement of Default
Case No. 4 The Case of the Automatic Extension of a Confirmation to a Credit
Case No. 5 The Case of the Error in the Transmission of Messages
Case No. 6 The Case of the Unauthorized Claiming Bank
Case No. 7 The Case of the Inconsistent Dating of Documents
Case No. 8 The Case of the Non-Documentary Condition
Case No. 9 The Case of Place of Presentation of Documen!and the Five-Day Time Limit
Case No. 10 The Case of Failure to Notify Discrepancies in the Documents
Case No. 11 The Case of the Rejected and Accepted Documents
Case No. 12 The Case of the Unreachable Negotiating Bank
Case No. 13 The Case of the Negotiation under Reserve
Chapter 2 Cases of Collection Based on URC522
Case No. 1 The Case of Releasing Documents not against Payment in D/P
Case No. 2 The Case of D/P Changed into D/A
Chapter 3 Cases of Remittance Brief
Case No. 1 The Case of T/T in International Trade
Part 3 Exercises on International
Settlement Exercise 1: A Small Test on URC ICC Publication
No.522 (1995 Version)
Exercise 2: Exercises on Application for the New Standard Documentary Credit form(ICC Publication No. 516)
Exercise 3: Exercises on Settlement
Exercise 4: Exercises on Types of Documentary Credits
Exercise 5: Exercises on Special Letters of Credit Based on the UCP600
Exercise 6: Exercises on Credit Issuance
Exercise 7: Exercises on Transport Documents
Exercise 8: Exercises on Some Miscellaneous Documents
Answers to the Exercises
References
Issuing Bank: Bank I, upon receipt pf the documents,determined that they were discrepant for the following reason: The bill of lading presented was a "received for shipment" bill oflading with a superimposed clause reading "clean on board. Theon board clause was typed on the bill of lading and was not dated asrequired by UCP600 Article 20 (ii). In order to facilitate the transaction, and as authorized in UCP600Article 16, Bank I notified the Applicant of the discrepancy andauthorization to pay the documents as presented. The Applicantrefused to waive the discrepancy or authorize payment of thediscrepant documents. Issuing Bank: Bank I immediately notified Bank A by telex ofthe rejection of the documents DUE TO the noted discrepancy andrequested instructions as to the disposal of the documents. Negotiating Bank: Bank notified the Beneficiary of the rejectionof the documents by Bank I. Bank A, as instructed by the Beneficiary,offered its indemnity against payment of discrepant documents.However, since the indemnity was offered to Bank I and the Applicantalready had refused to authorize the payment of the discrepantdocument, the indemnity was not accepted.