国际贸易实务英文版第二版课后习题答案

Insurance amount = CIF x ( 1 + markup rate) = 10 000 x 110% = USD11 000

Insurance premium = CIF insurance amount x insurance rate = 11 000 x 0. 4% = USD44

Answer: The insurance amount and insurance premium are USD11 000 and USD44 respectively.

3. Our exporting company offered light industrial products to a British importer at GBP10 000 per metric ton CIF London ( insurance covering All Risks with 10% markup and 1% premium rate). However, the importer intended to effect insurance by himself, as a result, he counter-offered CFR price. What is the CFR price? How much premium should the exporter need to deduct from the CIF price? CFR=CIF x (1-110% x R) =10000x(1-110% x1%) =GBP9890 Insurance premium = CIF -CFR = 10 000 -9 890 = GBP110

Answer: The CFR price is GBP9 890 per metric ton CFR London and the exporter should deduct GBPll0 from the CIF price as the premium. VI. Case studies

1. X Company signed a CIF contract to export candies. The cargo was insured for \voyage, candies absorbed sweating in the ship's hold, and thus softened and degraded. Was the insurance company liable for the damage? Why or why not?

析：答案：No。案例中提到“due to the long voyage，candies absorbed sweating in the ship's hold and thus softened and degraded”，这说明candies变软的原因在于长时间海上运输，吸收了船舱的热气所致。保险公司不应给予赔偿原因有三：1)在货物运输保险中没有“长时间运输”这一风险；2)candy变软是由于其本身的货物特性决定的，糖果即使在常温下摆放一段时间都会变软，因此可认为是糖果的内在瑕疵(inherent vice)所导致的；3)虽然一般附加险中包含了“heating and sweating'’这一险种，但此险种是指由于某种意外的原因(如船上的制冷设备坏了)导致船舱内温度、湿度突然变化，造成货物品质变化的情况，本案例不属于此情况。

答题的切入点：1）货物inherent vice属于保险公司的除外责任；2）“heating and sweating risk”的适用范围。

2. An exporter signed an FOB contract with a French company, and a CIF contract with a British company. Both cargoes were insured for marine cargo insurance. But in transit from the exporter's factory to the port of shipment, the goods were damaged. Under each deal, who should obtain insurance? Who should take the loss?

析：本题的解题要点：1)理解FOB和CIF合同中买卖双方中哪一方应该投保，虽然这两个合同都是“shipment contract”，买方负责主要路程的风险，如在FOB项下，风险在船舷转移，买方承担主要航程的风险，因此通常是买方会去投保；但在CIF项下，卖方有购买保险的责任，卖方是投保人。2)决定哪一方是货物的受损方，要看货物受损是发生在风险转移之前还是之后，发生在之前，卖方是受损方，之后，则买方是受损方。此外，在买了保险的情况下，受损方通常会提起索赔，但索赔要满足三个条件，如果投保人或受益人投了保，且风险在承保范围内，又对受损货物有可保利益，同时又能满足仓至仓条款，索赔人就可以向保险公司索赔。

1)答案：FOB下，进口商法国公司投保；CIF下出口商投保。 答题切入点：术语的理解。

2)答案：FOB下，出口商承担损失；CIF下出口商承担损失，但如果风险在承保范围内，出口商可以向保险公司索赔。

答题切入点：满足索赔的条件：保险范围、可保利益和保险起讫期限。

3. On a voyage the cargo ship had an accidental fire. To save the ship, the captain ordered to have water poured into the compartment. The fire was put out.

(1) For party X, her goods burnt amounted to 10% of USD0.5 million cargo;

(2) For party Y, his goods damaged due to water poured accounted for 20% of USD1 million cargo; (3) For the carrier, engine damages due to the fire equaled 10% of USD50 million ship; (4) Extra wages for the seamen totaled USD50 000. Based on the information above, indicate 1 ) Which is PA?

17

2) Which is GA?

3) What is the GA contribution for each party?

解：本题的关键在于对共同海损和单独海损的区别和共同海损分摊的计算。单独海损是承保风险所直接导致的船货损失。共同海损不是承保风险所直接导致的损失，而是指载货的船舶在海上遇到灾害或者意外事故，威胁到船货各方的共同安全，为解除这种危险，维护船货安全，由船方有意识地、合理地采取措施，所作出的某些特殊牺牲或支出的某些额外的费用。

1)答案：Party X和carrier的损失。

2)答案：Party Y的损失和海员的拯救费用。

答题切入点：共同海损和单独海损的区别，及满足共同海损的条件。 3）GA Total loss=20%×1+0.05=USD0.25m

GA Total Benefit=0.5×90%+50×90%+1=USD46.45m

GA contribution rate=[GA total loss/GA Total Benefit]×100% =(0.25/46．45)×100%=0.005 4×100%=0.54%

G.A. Contribution by X=0.5×90%×0.54%=0.002 43m≈USD2 430 G.A. Contribution by Y=1×0.54%=0.005 4m≈USD5 400

G.A. Contribution by Carrier=50×90%×0.54%=0．243m≈USD243 000 答题切入点：共同海损计算的步骤。

4. An importer signed an FOB contract with an Australian company, importing a batch of woolen blanket. The contract required that goods be carded by containers. The goods were packed as follows: each blanket in a plastic bag, four blankets to a large polyethylene bag. The importer effected insurance against WPA and War Risk. When goods arrived at the destination, the goods were found wet to different extents. Upon careful investigation, finally the importer found that there were several holes on the top of the container, the biggest of which was as big as 4cm in diameter. The importer faxed the exporter, asking for compensation. However, the exporter suggested the importer should lodge a claim against the insurer for compensation. Comment on this case and work out the solution.

析：本题的关键在于分析损失应该由谁来负责。

1)卖方的损失?这里要理解FOB术语中，出口方的交货的责任范围。本案例中卖方已经按合同和术语要求完成了交货，货物受损是在风险转移之后，因此损失应该由买方负责。

此部分的答题切入点：FOB术语中出口方责任的理解，风险转移点的理解。

2)保险公司负责理赔?案例中“the exporter suggested the importer lodge a claim against the insurer for compensation”一说不正确。进口商虽然投保了WPA和战争险，但损失是由于集装箱的问题造成的，属于第三方的责任，买方没有理由向保险公司索赔。

此部分的答题切入点：保险险别的承保范围，点出货物受损的直接原因。

3)谁是第三责任方?货物受损是由于承运人提供的集装箱出问题而导致的，因此，承运人应该负担责任，买方应该向承运人索赔。

此部分的答题切入点：承运人的责任。

5. An African seller signed a CIF contract exporting goods to an American buyer. The seller insured the goods against All Risks at the request of the buyer and transferred the insurance policy and the bill of lading to the buyer afterwards. In transit from the seller's warehouse to the port of shipment, the goods suffered losses which were within the insurance coverage. When the buyer asked the insurer for compensation with the insurance policy, the insurer refused to make compensation on the ground that the buyer held no insurable interest in the goods when the loss occurred. Comment on the case.

析：本题的解题要点：保险单转让之后，保险单的权益就有效地转让给了买方，买方就承受了保险单项下的全部权益。卖方在货物受损时对货物具有可保利益，但卖方把他的权益转让给买方之后，买方由权利向保险公司索赔本来属于卖方的权益。保险公司根据保险单承保范围和保险条款中的“仓至仓”条款，应该赔偿买方的损失。

答题切入点：1)保单转让后权益的变化；2)索赔的条件。

18

Unit 7 International Payments I. Multiple choices II. True or false statements 1 B F 2 D T 3 B T 4 C F 5 D F 6 A T 7 C T 8 A F 9 B T 10 B F

III. Short questions

1. After Bank X advised exporter Y of the L/C, the shipment was made. When the cargo was on the way, the importer filed for bankruptcy. Is Y out of luck of collecting the payment? Can the opening bank refuse to make reimbursement to the negotiating bank? Why or why not?

No, exporter Y does not need to worry about the payment. Because the payment is by L/C, the issuing bank is responsible for making payment regardless of the importer's situation. But the condition is that exporter Y can fulfill all the requirements listed on the L/ C. According to UCP600, a credit constitutes a definite undertaking of the opening bank to pay or to pay at maturity in case of acceptance. Therefore once the stipulated documents are presented to the opening bank and the terms and conditions of the credit are complied with, the opening bank cannot refuse to make reimbursement to the negotiating bank.

2. An L/C does not indicate whether it is revocable Or not, is it revocable? Can a revocable credit be transferable?

According to UCP600, if an L/C does not indicate whether it is irrevocable or not, it will be considered as irrevocable. And a transferable L/C must be irrevocable.

3. After a gullible importer paid Bank C against the seemingly correct shipping documents, he went to take the delivery, but found out that the goods were inferior counterfeits. Is Bank C liable under UCP600? Can the importer do anything in order to recover the loss?

Bank C is not liable in this case because UCP600 stipulates that in credit operations all parties concerned deal with documents, and not with goods, services and/or other performances to which the documents may relate. In order to recover the loss, the importer should rely on the sales contract and seek for solution.

4. An exporter, Wu Co. , received an L/C issued by Bank B and confirmed by Bank K. After Wu shipped the goods, Bank B declared bankruptcy. Will Wu have sleepless nights?

No, Wu Co. does not need to worry about the payment. When the L/C is confirmed, the confirming bank holds the same definite undertaking as the issuing bank to pay or to pay at maturity in case of acceptance. 5. Does a payment credit differ from a sight credit?

A payment credit could be settled by sight payment or deferred payment. In\issuing bank may not be necessary. While when a sight credit is used, payment would be made immediately against a sight draft and required commercial documents.

6. Are the following credits transferable? (A) This L/C is assignable; (B) This L/C is transmissible; (C) This L/C is fractionable; (D) This L/C is divisible.

According to UCP600, a credit can be transferred only if it is expressly designated as \issuing bank. Terms such as \Credit transferable.

7. Under an anticipatory credit, the exporter made an advance, but disappeared without presenting the documents as required. Who is liable for repayment of the advance?

The special clause is required by the applicant, as a result he has to make repayment of the advances if the beneficiary fails to present documents for settlement.

8. Use an example to explain why a back-to-back credit is needed.

A back to back credit is normally used by middleperson for the protection of his interest. For example, agent A

19

received a documentary credit from the end buyer B, A can use this credit as a backup to apply for the opening of a new credit in favor of the end supplier C. By doing so A can be sure that neither B nor C would know each other, therefore well protecting A's business confidentiality.

9. What is the difference between a back-to-back credit and a transferable credit?

When a back-to-back credit is used, there actually involve two credits. When a transferable credit is used, operation is based on only one credit. IV. Case studies

1. On September 1, X Company signed a contract to export goods to the U. S. On September 30, City Bank sent an irrevocable L/C with an amount of USD30, 000. The L/C stipulated shipment during October, and Bank of Tokyo to be the reimbursing bank. On October 2, Bank of China advised X of the L/C. But ten days later, X learnt that the importer was near bankruptcy. How should X deal with the situation?

析：1)案例中X公司收到的是一份不可撤销的信用证(an irrevocable L/c)，说明X公司在满足信用证所列条件的情况下，可以直接从开证行或开证行指定银行获得货款，而不需考虑进口商的状况。2)在这种情况下，X公司在做决策时，需要考虑的一是自身完成信用证所列条件的能力，二是与进口商的合作问题。

答题切入点：1)信用证支付情况下各方的关系；2)X公司可选择的做法及注意事项。

2. F, a state-owned enterprise, signed a contract to import 1 000 M/T of galvanized steel sheets from a H. K. company. On March 1, a Shanghai bank issued the L/C for USD200, 000. On March 24, container shipment was made. On March 25, the negotiating bank in H. K. negotiated the draft along with the shipping documents. On March 26, the opening bank received the \March 30, it was found that inside the container were rusted iron drums, rather than the ordered steel sheets. The issuing bank was immediately notified of the fraud, but it could not refuse to take up the documents. In April 5, F co. uncovered that the commodity specified on the B/L was 50 mm, inconsistent with 50 cm required by the L/C. On April 14, the issuing bank requested the HK bank to exercise the right of recourse. (a) Would there be any problem with the recourse? (b)What were the lessons?

析：1)在3月30日进口方发现货不对板，通知开证行时开证行“could not refuse to take up the document”，这里说明开证行尽管知道货不对板，但如果它认为议付行所提交的单证与信用证相符，开证行必须依照信用证规定的义务行事，即对议付行进行偿付。因为，在信用证的运作下，各方只凭单据操作，而不涉及实际的货物。2)4月5日进口商发现单据有不符点，可以想象的结果就是进口商拒绝赎单付款。此时开证行已向议付行支付了货款，而又遭到进口商以正当理由拒绝赎单付款，它是遭受损失的一方，因此会向议付行提出行使追索权。3)但根据UCP600开证行进行的议付是“无追索权的议付”。

(1)答案：Yes．

答题切入点：UCP600对开证行责任的规定。

(2)答题切入点：在分析所吸取教训的时候，要分步进行。1)首先要分析在这起事件中哪几方遭受损失；2)然后进一步说明各方遭受损失的原因；3)最后提出预防类似情况出现的方法。

3. FF Company signed a contract to export goods to AA company in Africa. In September FF was notified of the L/C, but the money of account was different from that required by the sales contract. Besides, the goods were not ready for shipment. In November, AA urged FF to deliver the goods. FF requested an L/C amendment and an extension of the shipment date. The next day, AA cabled back, \amended. \FF shipped the goods. However, the amended L/C never arrived, and the opening bank refused to pay against the shipping documents. The goods were stored in the warehouse at the port of destination. FF had to pay much rent and insurance. At this time, AA requested D/A. Should FF accept it? Is there any lesson to be learnt from this case?

析：案例中由于AA公司没有如约修改信用证，使得FF公司提交的单据不符合信用证的要求，这时作为银行付款承诺的信用证已经失效。买卖双方的支付关系又回到了依靠商业信用的情况。而这时AA公司要求使用承兑交单(D/A)，即是要求卖方同意在买方只作出支付承诺(承兑)而未付款的情况下获得可以提取货物的单据。

20

答题切入点：1)解释D/A的应用特点；2)对AA的过往行为进行判断，对其要求D/A的目的进行分析；3)FF如果同意采用D/A可能出现的后果；4)FF是受损一方，分析其在不同阶段所犯的错误及预防错误的方法。

4. A Chinese bank issued standby Ls/C totaling millions of U. S. dollars, in favor of an U.S. company. These were irrevocable, transferable standby Ls/C valid for one year. When questioned by the supervising agency, the bank stated that these were merely evidence of absorbed foreign investment, \principal and interest, and bears no responsibility, economic or legal, for the funds.\bank?

析：1)本案例中各方的关系可能是：某中国公司要某美国公司投资某项目，作为完成项目的担保，向银行申请开出一份备用信用证，受益方是美国公司。中国公司在申请信用证的时候可能游说银行，使其相信这只是帮助吸引外资的一个文件，该公司会承担完成项目的责任，而美国公司则负责出资，所以银行不会承担任何风险。中方银行在对备用信用证没有了解的情况下同意该操作。2)备用信用证尽管是一种特殊的信用证，它为申请人提供担保，在申请人未能完成所规定义务的情况下向受益人支付约定的款项；但它的本质还是一份信用证，即在符合条件的情况下开证行对受益人承诺付款义务。3)案例中的开证行对备用信用证了解不透，误解了它所应承担的责任，因此也忽略了它可能承担的风险：当中国公司不能履行其义务时，开证行是要向美国公司支付相应款项的。

答案：Yes．答题切入点：1)备用信用证的特点；2)信用证使用中开证行的义务；3)案例中如果申请人不能履行义务，开证行的责任。

21