could you pls clarify the reason why a bill of lading made out to the order of a bank, is sometimes endorsed by the shipper. knowing that it is for the bank to endorse it.
Does this endorsement have any meaning or legal effect?
When you endorse any B/L you can't forget the ones in which you have to endorse them.
And endorsing doesn't bring any negative effect to the other parties whereas a forgottewn endorsement might/will do.
-Each long journey starts with a small step-
When B/L is made out to the order of a named bank, any endorsement made by a third party including shipper stands void. This is because the goods is in that stage in the bank's hand as owner of goods. Endorsement by the shipper can be valid where consignee is stated TO ORDER ot TO THE ORDER OF THE SHIPPER. Only consignee (when is indicated TO ORDER OF XYZ) is legally entitled to endorse the B/L, that is, it has the full right to TRANSFER THE PROPERTY OF GOODS. Can other party do that? Obviously not. This endorsement does not apply where consignee is a named party (i.e. without 'TO ORDER OF' being in this case non-negotiable BL )
Very well explained cristian. I have one doubt. What is the difference between "To the Order" V. "To the order of Shipper" BLs? If both are same, then why some LCs ask for "To the Order" while some ask for "To the Order of Shipper BL"?