Charging the debt from the Buyer in relation to non-payment under CAD terms and under the issued Bill of Exchange

28 февраля 2017 г.: ru 45 en 327 февраля 2017 г.: ru 7 en 523 февраля 2017 г.: ru 7 en 1 всего: 116 21.02.17

The Client – foreign trader concluded commercial contract on grain product supply in containers under CFR terms, the Turkish port.

The Parties agreed that the Seller shall pay for the goods not later than 3 days after receiving the arranged set of original documents by the Buyer’s Bank (cash against documents – CAD).

In course of performance of his assumed obligations, the Seller supplied the goods in Turkey and submitted the documents on goods by banking channels to the Buyer’s bank. The transfer of the documents was made with Collection of Payment issued under ICC URC 522.

But payment was not made within the term set forth in the Contract. Moreover, due to financial problems and the risk of container idle stay at the port of destination. The Buyer applied to the Seller asking to provide with instructions  on issuing the full set of documents without payment but against Bill of Exchange. In accordance with Bill of Exchange, the Buyer guaranteed payment for goods within 15 days after submission of this document.

The Seller accepted the Buyer’s concessions. The Collection of Payment was modified. The Buyer’s Bank issued original documents against the signed Bill of Exchange. The goods were accepted at the port of destination, cleared for import and resold.

The Seller required the Buyer to pay for accepted and resold goods on the grounds of Bill of Exchange. But payment was not made within the prescribed 15 days. The Bill of Exchange was also submitted by SWIFT banking channels.

For several months neither the Buyer nor the Buyer’s Bank replied to the Seller’s numerous letters.

The Seller filed a request for the defense of their interests to Interlegal.

Having proceeded the case, Interlegal experts found out that the Seller made several mistakes while modifying payment procedure and terms. Moreover, the Bill of Exchange signed by the Parties was issued out of the scope of ICC URC 522. Banks were conventionally engaged in payment guarantees. The terms for initiation of arbitration proceedings were omitted.

Settlement of the problem required for the complex approach.

Due to the prepared plan of actions and legal opinion, Interlegal lawyers managed: to initiate GAFTA arbitration proceedings; to involve the engaged Banks into negotiations both between each other and with the Parties to the Contract; to initiate direct negotiations with the Buyer by reference of the Interlegal Turkish lawyers;

Another problem was that neither the Buyer nor the Buyer’s Bank provided any written comments or rejections. But despite such principal position, Interlegal lawyers fixed mandatory agreements between the Parties upon debt recovery by installments within the fixed terms by means of SWIFT system.

Such complex and competent actions resulted in payment for the goods supplied under the Contract.


Interlegal lawyer Olena Ptashenchuk under general supervision of partner Natalya Myroshnychenko led the case.

  • Interlegal lawyers defended the Client’s interests at GAFTA arbitration2019.07.16

    Interlegal won the dispute at GAFTA arbitration upon non-performance of the contract regarding prohibition to import yellow peas in India, d...

    show more
  • Interlegal proved unlawfulness of penalty accrual for late return of earnings2019.07.16

    Interlegal represented interests of its Client – large Ukrainian ship repair yard – under the court proceedings on recognizing as unlawful a...

    show more
  • Lawyers of Interlegal successfully settled a dispute over recovery of damages incurred due to collision of vessels2019.07.01

    Client, a foreign shipowner, contacted Interlegal with a request to recover damages incurred as a result of collision of vessels. Circums...

    show more
  • Interlegal consulted the client upon seafarers’ salary taxation2019.07.01

    The client applied to Interlegal for legal advice upon salary taxation for seafarers – citizens of Ukraine receiving salaries from the forei...

    show more
  • Interlegal lawyers defended the Shipowner’s interests during PSC inspection2019.06.24

    The Client, large foreign shipowner, applied to Interlegal on representing its interests during PSC inspection upon compliance with internat...

    show more
  • Consulting upon tax system in Switzerland2019.06.21

    Interlegal corporate lawyers consulted the client upon tax system in Switzerland and foreign citizen employment at Swiss companies. Each...

    show more
  • Interlegal team succeeded in defense of the Charterer’s interests under the dispute on demurrage2019.06.21

    The Client – Charterer applied to Interlegal due to the Shipowner’s unlawful claims on demurrage recovery. In the process of loading and...

    show more
  • Interlegal lawyers drafted the Settlement Agreement due to breach of the Supply Contract by the Counteragent2019.06.05

    The Client, large Ukrainian elevator, filed a request to Interlegal on drafting the Settlement Agreement due to breach of the Supply Contrac...

    show more
  • Interlegal lawyers drafted business inheritance scheme for the client2019.05.27

    The client applied to Interlegal for its business inheritance scheme. Since the business corporate structure includes, inter alia, non-re...

    show more
  • Interlegal expansion in Best Lawyers rating2019.05.24

    Two Interlegal partners joined the Ukrainian top lawyers in Best Lawyers rating. Arthur Nitsevych confirmed his high positions in three n...

    show more