Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:48:47.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Consarc Corp. v. Iraqi Ministry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Keith Highet ,
George Kahale III  and
H. Rosemary Jeronimides
H. Rosemary Jeronimides
Affiliation:
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

International tradeIraqi sanctions programletters of credit
Type
International Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 89 , Issue 1 , January 1995 , pp. 131 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Rafidain is an entity controlled by the Government of Iraq.

2 55 Fed. Reg. 31,803 (1990).

3 31 C.F.R. §§575.101–575.901 (1993).

4 Consarc Corp. v. Iraqi Ministry of Indus., No. 90–2269–SS, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4884, at *3 (D.D.C. Apr. 10, 1991).

5 Id.

6 The license did not permit the transfer of funds or the execution of any judgment.

7 Consarc Corp. v. Iraqi Ministry of Indus. & Minerals, No. 90–2269–SS, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11,646 (D.D.C. Aug. 22, 1991).

8 Consarc Corp. v. Iraqi Ministry of Indus. & Minerals, No. 90–2269–SS, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19,727 (D.D.C. Dec. 29, 1992).

9 Id. at *3.

10 Id.

11 50 U.S.C. §§1701–1706 (West Supp. 1989).

12 The court pointed to the following cases: Rockwell Int’l Sys. Inc. v. Citibank S.A., 719 F.2d 583, 589 (2d Cir. 1983); KMW Int’l v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 606 F.2d 10, 16 (2d Cir. 1979).

13 See Centrifugal Casting Mach. v. American Bank & Trust, 966 F.2d 1348 (10th Cir. 1992); Semetex Corp. v. UBAF Arab Am. Bank, 853 F.Supp. 759 (S.D.N.Y. 1994); Engel Indus, v. First Am. Bank, 803 F.Supp. 426 (D.D.C. 1992).

14 Semetex, 853 F.Supp. at 770.

15 966 F.2d at 1351.

16 Id. at 1349.

17 Id.

18 Id. at 1352–53

19 Id. at 1351.

20 Id.

21 Id. at 1351 n.4.

22 The issuing bank remains liable to the beneficiary in the event that the confirming bank does not pay. “A confirmation of an irrevocable Credit by another bank (the ‘Confirming Bank’) upon the authorisation or request of the Issuing Bank, constitutes a definite undertaking of the Confirming Bank, in addition to that of the Issuing Bank ….” International Chamber of Commerce, Pub. No. 500, Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, Art. 14(d)(i) (1993 rev. in force as of Jan. 1, 1994) [hereinafter UCP].

23 Centrifugal, 966 F.2d at 1352; Semetex, 853 F.Supp. at 770.

24 966 F.2d at 1352.

25 853 F.Supp. at 771.

26 UCP, supra note 22, Art. 3(a).

27 966 F.2d at 1353.

28 Id.

29 “A Credit may be advised to a Beneficiary through another bank (the ‘Advising Bank’) without engagement on the part of the Advising Bank ….” UCP, supra note 22, Art. 7(a).