The credit stated "Certificate of origin must be mark Issued retrospectively if issued after B/L date"
COO presented is issued after B/L date, but marked Issued Retroactively.
I've searched in dictionary both Retroactively and Retrospectively is similar word.
can it be considered as discrepancy??
Because in this case, the COO's issuer is not allowed to marked Issued Retrospectively anymore.
Thank's alot :)
The LC is seeking an assuance from the issuer of the COO that the goods being addressed in the document are those being shipped since, in this case, the CO is issued after the goods have been loaded OB a vessel. I am unsure if a simple statement: "Issued Retroactively" will suffice. It depends on how it is used in the document.
without being a ntive speaker, I would distinguish the words as follows:
"retroactively" = issued at a later date with full effect from the "date of the past" mentioned herein.
"retrospectively" = issued in reviewing the happening at a later date (without giving effect from that "date of the
In this connection, anything issued retroactively also contains a restrospective confirmation.
"Retroactively" would be my choice for example for an extension of a guarantee or a credit after it has expired, thus expressing that the credit has (by virtue of that amendment) not expired at all. The same would apply for an export licence, confirming that the goods were not smuggled out of the exporting country.
For a certificate of origin IMHO "retrospectively" should be sufficient.
IMHO the coo is fully complying.
Native speakers demanded!
-Each long journey starts with a small step-