چکیده:
Among various e-commerce tools, documentary credits have received more attention due to their widespread use. However, with the emergence of the bank payment obligation tool in 2013, questions about the differences and doubts about the application and scope of each one occupied the minds of legal scholars. The authors of this article, in order to partially fill the research gap regarding the comparison of the two subjects, have sought to state the differences and explain the scope and application of each of these tools. The research that ultimately concludes that, given the difference in function and structure of the two institutions of documentary credit and bank payment obligation and the difference in legal relationships existing in them, each of them is specific to certain categories of traders and their transactions that are useful in their place, are used and cannot replace each other.
خلاصه ماشینی:
After that, in need of further securing transactions, the uniform regulations for bank payment undertaking 5 were approved by the Trade Commission of the International Chamber of Commerce and the Interbank Services Association (Swift) 6 without replacing the previous regulations, and according to which bank payment undertaking 7, along with documentary credits, was considered one of the fast and secure tools in this field.
This practice continued until 2013, when the first enforceable bank payment undertaking regulations were approved, until the International Chamber of Commerce and the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (Swift) approved uniform regulations for bank payment undertaking, which stated in the introduction that it was invented as a middle ground 1 for traditional documentary credits 2 and open account 3.
According to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, documentary credits are: any kind of agreement whereby a bank (the issuing bank) undertakes, at the request and instruction of a credit applicant, to pay or to arrange for payment to a beneficiary or to accept drafts drawn by him, or to authorize another bank to do so, against presentation of documents complying with the terms and conditions of the credit.
On the other hand, some scholars of international trade believe that the data-driven method of bank payment obligation exempts the parties from insuring to ensure payment of funds, while letters of credit lack such functionality and even the insurance policy is among the most basic transport documents that must be presented to the bank by the beneficiary and its authenticity confirmed.
(
, 
, 
)
