Discover how Incoterms 2020 simplifies global trade for importers and exporters with key shipping terms like EXW, FOB, CIF, DDP. Understand the rules governing international trade and logistics. Learn about essential trade finance instruments including UCP 600, ISBP 821, SWIFT MT700/MT710, and compliance topics like AML/KYC, TBML, FATF Guidelines. Perfect for importers, exporters, freight forwarders, and trade professionals.
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud Trade Finance & Letter of Credit Specialist Inco-Terms – Trade Finance Insights
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud is a trade finance specialist with over 24 years of banking experience in letters of credit, shipping documentation, and international trade compliance. His insights on finance and trade have been featured in respected publications including CFO Drive,Financial Tech Times and featured.com.
Professional Overview
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud is a banking and trade finance professional with practical experience in financial operations and day-to-day banking processes. His work focuses on accuracy, regulatory awareness, and operational discipline—core elements of effective banking practice.
Alongside his professional role, Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud writes about banking operations, trade finance workflows, and professional development. His writing emphasizes real-world scenarios, simplified explanations, and responsible financial practices.
Areas of Focus
The primary professional and writing focus areas of Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud include
Trade finance operations and documentation
Banking procedures and operational workflows
Compliance awareness and process discipline
Professional growth in financial institutions
Practical insights for banking professionals
These focus areas reflect his commitment to sharing applicable knowledge grounded in professional experience.
Writing and Publications
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud contributes professional insights through articles and commentary across digital platforms. His written work addresses common operational challenges, documentation practices, and career-related topics within the banking sector.
He has published insights on recognized professional platforms and continues to expand his portfolio with content aimed at clarity, usefulness, and professional relevance.
Audience and Professional Reach
Through consistent engagement on professional platforms, Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud connects with banking professionals, early-career finance practitioners, and readers interested in practical financial knowledge. His audience primarily consists of individuals seeking applied insights rather than academic or theoretical discussions.
Online Presence
Verified professional profiles and publications of Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud can be found on the following platforms:
LinkedIn: Professional updates, industry insights, and engagement
Medium: Long-form articles and published insights
Professional blogs and featured platforms: Expert contributions
Collaboration and Contact
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud is open to professional collaboration, editorial contributions, and knowledge-sharing opportunities aligned with banking, trade finance, and professional development topics.
For collaboration details and background verification, please refer to his official professional pages and publications.
Frequently Asked Questions:
Who is Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud?
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud is a banking and trade finance professional and writer based in Bangladesh, focusing on practical banking knowledge and professional development.
What topics does Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud cover?
He covers trade finance operations, banking procedures, compliance awareness, and workplace insights within financial institutions.
Where can published work by Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud be found?
His published insights are available across professional platforms, including Medium and other recognized digital publications.
Closing Statement
This media kit is provided to support accurate professional representation of Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmud across publications, professional platforms, and search engines.
Audience Analytics
LinkedIn Audience
1,800+ Followers
500+ Professional Connections
Audience includes:
Bankers
Exporters
Importers
Finance professionals
Supply chain & logistics executives
Entrepreneurs & SME owners
Content Reach
Multiple posts achieved significant visibility, reaching several thousand impressions across professional platforms.
Partial Shipment Rules Under UCP 600: Avoiding LC Discrepancies
Last Updated: 15 November 2025
Understanding the Real Meaning of
“Partial Shipment”
I remember early in my trade finance days, I was helping a client handle a letter of credit, and we ran into the concept of partial shipments. It’s actually pretty straightforward once you see it in action.
Yes. Partial shipments are allowed unless prohibited in the credit.
Reference:
UCP 600 — Article 31(a):
“Partial shipments are allowed.”
Q2 — What creates a partial shipment according to UCP 600?
Answer:
A shipment is partial when goods are shipped on more than one means of conveyance, even if they are shipped on the same day.
Reference:
UCP 600 — Article 31(b):
“Shipment on more than one vessel, aircraft or other means of conveyance, even if for the same destination and on the same day, will be considered a partial shipment.”
Q3 — Do different loading dates (different dates of shipment) create a partial shipment?
Answer:
No.
Different loading dates do not constitute a partial shipment as long as the transport documents indicate shipment on the same means of conveyance (same vessel, same voyage).
Reference:
UCP 600— Article 31(b) :
"A presentation consisting of more than one set of transport documents
evidencing shipment commencing on the same means of conveyance and for the same
journey, provided they indicate the same destination, will not be regarded as covering a
partial shipment, even if they indicate different dates of shipment or different ports of
loading, places of taking in charge or dispatch. If the presentation consists of more than
one set of transport documents, the latest date of shipment as evidenced on any of the
sets of transport documents will be regarded as the date of shipment.
A presentation consisting of one or more sets of transport documents evidencing
shipment on more than one means of conveyance within the same mode of transport will
be regarded as covering a partial shipment, even if the means of conveyance leave on
the same day for the same destination."
Q4 — If an LC prohibits partial shipments, what conditions must the documents meet?
Answer:
All goods must be shown as shipped on:
one vessel / one means of transport one voyage / one flight one shipment operation
Any split across different conveyances = partial shipment = discrepancy.
Reference:
Derived from UCP 600 — Article 31(b) (definition of partial shipment)
Because if more than one means of conveyance is used → partial shipment → not allowed when LC prohibits it.
Q5 — Do multiple transport documents automatically create a partial shipment?
Answer:
No.
Multiple transport documents do not result in a partial shipment if:
they show the same vessel/flight same voyage same loading and discharge points
Reference:
UCP 600 Article 31(b) :
" A presentation consisting of more than one set of transport documents
evidencing shipment commencing on the same means of conveyance and for the same
journey, provided they indicate the same destination, will not be regarded as covering a
partial shipment, even if they indicate different dates of shipment or different ports of
loading, places of taking in charge or dispatch. If the presentation consists of more than
one set of transport documents, the latest date of shipment as evidenced on any of the
sets of transport documents will be regarded as the date of shipment.
A presentation consisting of one or more sets of transport documents evidencing
shipment on more than one means of conveyance within the same mode of transport will
be regarded as covering a partial shipment, even if the means of conveyance leave on
the same day for the same destination."
Q6 — Are partial drawings allowed under UCP 600?
Answer:
Yes. Partial drawings are allowed unless the LC prohibits them.
Reference:
UCP 600 — Article 31(a)):
“Partial drawings or shipments are allowed.”
Q7 — What happens if an LC requires instalment shipments and one instalment is missed?
Answer:
If the beneficiary fails to ship or draw under one instalment within the required period,
the credit ceases to be available for that and any subsequent instalment unless the credit states otherwise.
Reference:
UCP 600 — Article 32 :
If a drawing or shipment by instalments within given periods is stipulated in the
credit and any instalment is not drawn or shipped within the period allowed for that
instalment, the credit ceases to be available for that and any subsequent instalment.
Q8 — If goods are loaded on different days but shown as one shipment on one vessel, is this partial shipment?
Answer:
No.
Different loading dates are not relevant as long as the transport document consolidates the shipment on the same vessel and voyage.
Reference:
ISBP 745:
“Different dates of shipment or loading do not create a partial shipment when the documents indicate shipment on the same vessel and voyage.”
Q9 — What if the beneficiary presents several B/Ls because different containers were used?
Answer:
Not a partial shipment, as long as the B/Ls show:
same vessel same voyage same loading/discharge ports
Reference:
precise reference ISBP 745 also clarifies on UCPDC:
Multiple B/Ls issued for separate containers are not partial shipments if they indicate shipment on the same vessel/voyage.
Q10 — What if two transport documents show different vessels?
Answer:
This is a partial shipment, regardless of date, container use, or place of loading.
Reference:
UCP 600 — Article 31(b):
Shipment on more than one vessel or means of conveyance = partial shipment.
In the world of documentary credits, few
terms are as operationally sensitive — yet often misunderstood — as Partial
Shipment. In international Shippingthis term determines not only how goods move, but how money moves. A single misinterpretation can trigger LC discrepancies, delay payment, or even derail the entire transaction.
But for trade finance professionals and documentary credit specialists, the
question is not how goods move physically — it is how
shipment is represented in the transport document, and how
the credit terms interact with UCP 600.
The governing provision, UCP 600 Article 31,
remains one of the most critical interpretive clauses for both banks and
traders. Understanding it goes beyond knowing the words — it requires grasping
the banking logic and legal effect of each subsection.
1. Article 31(a): Partial Drawings or Partial Shipments Are Allowed.
“Partial Drawings or Partial Shipments Are Allowed.”
This is a foundational rule. Unless the L/C explicitly states “Partial
shipments not allowed”, the beneficiary is entitled to make multiple
shipments under one credit.
Expert Analysis:
·The default permission
protects exporters, ensuring flexibility in supply or production schedules.
·The onus is on the
applicant (importer) to prohibit it when uniform delivery is
required.
·A bank’s duty is to apply
the default rule strictly — it cannot infer prohibition if not
expressly stated.
Practical Risk:
Many discrepancies arise when applicants assume that “one shipment only” is
implied — but under UCP, only express wording
restricts partial shipment.
Hence, the precise drafting of the credit
is critical.
2. Article 31(b): Same Conveyance ≠ Partial Shipment
“A shipment on the same vessel, aircraft, or other means of conveyance is
not considered to be a partial shipment even if separate sets of transport
documents are presented, provided that the goods are shipped under one contract
of carriage for the same destination.”
Expert Interpretation:
Here, the ICC clarifies that the means of conveyance
and contract of carriage are the determining factors
— not the number of documents or dates.
So, if goods are shipped:
·On the same vessel,
·Under the same contract of
carriage, and
·Bound for the same port or place
of destination,
then even if multiple Bills of Lading are issued or the loading occurs over
several days, the presentation is not to
be treated as a partial shipment.
Operational Example:
A shipment of 1,000 MT of copper cathodes loaded in three batches on the
same vessel MV Silver Sea, from
Shanghai to Singapore, with three Bills of Lading:
·BL No. 1 dated 10 June
·BL No. 2 dated 11 June
·BL No. 3 dated 12 June
Result:
This is one shipment, not
partial, as per Article 31(b).
Bank Practice Note :
Banks should cross-check:
·Vessel name
— must be identical across documents.
·Destination
— must match.
·Carriage contract
— must show one continuous voyage.
If these are consistent, separate Bills of Lading do not
constitute partial shipment.
3. Article 31(c): Different Conveyances = Partial Shipment
“If more than one set of transport documents evidences shipment on more than
one means of conveyance, even if for the same destination and on the same day,
this constitutes partial shipment.”
Interpretation:
Whenever goods are shipped using different vessels,
trucks, or aircraft, each carriage is a distinct
shipment.
This remains true even if:
·The shipments depart on the same day, or
·The destination is identical.
Case Study:
A seller ships 500 MT of goods on MV Pacific Star and another 500
MT on MV Atlantic Wind, both destined for Dubai on the same date.
Result:
This is a partial shipment, as it
involves different conveyances.
If the L/C prohibits partial shipment, this would constitute a discrepant
presentation.
Expert Commentary:
The ICC rule recognizes that different carriers mean different
contracts of carriage — hence, separate risk exposure and
delivery timelines. From a bank’s perspective, that equals partial
shipment, irrespective of physical simultaneity.
4. Article 31(d): Multimodal Transport Documents (MTDs)
Modern trade logistics often involve combined transport,
such as “truck + sea” or “rail + air.”
Under Article 31(d), if the goods are dispatched from different places but
covered under a single MTD, and
represent one continuous transport,
the shipment is not partial.
Operational Meaning:
Even if loading happens at different inland depots or ports, as long as:
·The MTD shows one contract
of carriage, and
·The goods are moving to the same
final destination,
Note:
Document checkers must verify:
·Only one multimodal
transport document is issued.
·It covers all goods,
same consignee, same destination.
5. Documentary Examination: The Banker’s Checklist
Banks examine documents — not physical goods.
Hence, the determination of partial shipment is
purely documentary.
Check Item
Bank’s Examination Focus
Result
Check
Item
Bank’s
Examination Focus
Result
Vessel / Transport name
Same vs. different conveyance
Different = partial
Number of transport documents
One or more sets
Multiple = potential partial
Destination
Identical or different
Different = partial
Issue date
Not decisive alone
Different dates can still be
single shipment
Carriage contract
Continuous or separate
Separate = partial
6.
Transshipment vs. Partial Shipment — Common Confusion
These two terms are often
conflated but legally distinct:
Term
Meaning
UCP Reference
Partial Shipment
Delivery of goods in two or
more separate consignments under one credit
Article 31
Transshipment
Transfer of goods from one
vessel to another during carriage to the final destination
Article 20(c)
A transshipment is not a partial
shipment.
Transshipment happens after shipment has
occurred, not instead of it.
Expert
Tip:
An L/C may allow partial shipments but prohibit transshipment, or vice
versa.
Each must be evaluated separately during document checking.
7. Case Insight — ICC Opinion TA 617rev (2007)
This ICC opinion clarified that multiple Bills of
Lading issued for the same vessel, same destination, and same voyagedo not represent a partial shipment.
The deciding factor is the conveyance, not
the number of documents or onboard dates.
Professional
Takeaway:
This opinion reinforces Article 31(b) and remains a cornerstone for professionals handling multi-document presentations.
8. Commercial
& Risk Implications
Stakeholder
Why
It Matters
Exporter / Beneficiary
Flexibility to deliver goods in
stages. Must check L/C terms before shipping.
Importer / Applicant
May prohibit partial shipment to
ensure full cargo arrival.
Issuing Bank
Ensures compliance with L/C and
UCP 600 Article 31; avoids wrongful honor.
Advising / Negotiating Bank
Must detect discrepancies early to
avoid liability under Article 14.
Risk of Misinterpretation:
·Incorrectly treating a multi-BL shipment on the
same vessel as “partial” may cause wrongful refusal.
·Conversely, overlooking truly separate
conveyances may expose the bank to reimbursement risk.
2.Means
of conveyance and carriage contract are decisive, not number of
documents.
3.One
vessel = one shipment, even if multiple B/Ls.
4.Different
vessels or transport = partial shipment, regardless of date or
destination.
5.Multimodal
document under one contract = not partial.
6.Always
cross-check destination, vessel,
and carriage terms before determining compliance.
Case Study: Partial Shipment
Dispute under UCP 600
Scenario:
An issuing bank enters into a documentary credit (L/C) governed by UCP 600 that
is expressly marked “Partial shipments **not allowed”.
The credit requires shipment of 10,000 MT of cement
from a Chinese port to New York. The credit specifies that all documents must
evidence shipment in one lot (i.e., no partial shipments or drawings).
The beneficiary presents two sets of transport and shipping documents:
·Set 1: Bill of Lading (“BL 1”) dated 1 May 2010,
voyage No. 888 on vessel MV OMG, covering 6,000 MT
discharged at New York.
·Set 2: Bill of Lading (“BL 2”) also dated 1 May
2010 (later in the day) on the same vessel MV OMG, same
voyage No. 888, same destination New York, covering the remaining 4,000 MT.
The issuing bank refuses the presentation, stating: “Partial shipment is
made and is not allowed in the credit.” The beneficiary argues that under
Article 31(b) of UCP 600 the two shipments were on the same
vessel, same voyage, same
destination, hence they should not be treated as partial shipments.
Analysis of the Dispute
1.UCP
600 Article 31(b) & (c) Application
oArticle 31(a): “Partial drawings or shipments
are allowed.” Here the credit prohibits
partial shipments—so the default permission is removed.
oArticle 31(b): “A presentation consisting of
more than one set of transport documents evidencing shipment commencing on the
same means of conveyance and for the same journey, … will not be regarded as covering
a partial shipment, even if they indicate different dates of shipment or
different ports of loading…”
oArticle 31(c): “A presentation consisting of one
or more sets of transport documents evidencing shipment on more than one means
of conveyance … will be regarded as covering a partial shipment…”
In this scenario:
oThe conveyance is the same
vessel (MV OMG) on the same voyage number 888;
oDestination is identical (New York);
oLoading is split into two sets, but still under
the same voyage.
Issue: This conflicts with UCP 600 Article 31(b) and ICC Opinion TA 617rev. Two BLs on the same vessel, same voyage, same destination do not constitute a partial shipment, even if the credit prohibits partial shipment.
Correction: Update conclusion to reflect CDCS-level accuracy:
“According to Article 31(b) and ICC Opinion TA 617rev, the two BLs on MV OMG are considered a single shipment. The bank’s refusal is technically incorrect, though practically exporters may still consolidate documents to avoid disputes."
2.Interpretation:
Number of Bills of Lading vs Conveyance
3.Practical
Bank / Exporter Considerations
oThe bank must check field 43P (Partial
shipments) in the credit: here it states “Not allowed”. That means the
beneficiary must present documents evidencing one single shipment.
oEven though the voyage and vessel are identical,
presenting two BLs suggests two shipments (two loadings). The bank is correct
to challenge the presentation.
oThe beneficiary should have arranged for one BL
covering full 10,000 MT (or other single document) if the credit prohibits
partial shipments.
oThe exporter may argue logistics required two
loadings, but the credit terms override operational realities — non-compliance
leads to discrepancy.
4. Key Takeaway
oWhen a credit prohibits
partial shipments, the beneficiary must ensure the indication of one shipment
in documents — ideally one transport document or one set of documents.
oEven though UCP 600 provides a narrow allowance
under Article 31(b) for “same conveyance”, that is only relevant where the
credit allows partial shipments. If it prohibits them, the narrow allowance
becomes moot.
oBanks must document their refusal carefully,
referencing the credit field and Article 31(a) + prohibition.
oExporters must consider drafting and logistics
early: if partial shipments may occur, ask for the credit to allow them (field
43P = “Allowed”).
Final Summary
In this case, the issuing bank’s refusal is justified:
the credit explicitly prohibits partial shipments, and the presentation of two
separate BLs covering two distinct loading sets constitutes two shipments,
which breaches the credit. Even though both shipments were on the same vessel
and voyage, under the prohibition clause the beneficiary should have
consolidated into one shipment/document set.
Critique and Refinement of the Case
Study Conclusion
The central point of conflict is: Does the express prohibition of
partial shipments in the credit (Article 31(a) override the definitional
clarification of what constitutes a partial shipment in Article
31(b)?
UCP 600 Provision
Effect
Article 31(a)
Sets the condition
for allowing/prohibiting partial shipments. (Here: Prohibited).
Article 31(b)
Provides the definition
for when multiple transport documents on the same conveyance are NOT
considered a partial shipment.
The Precedent and Definitive View
The long-standing ICC Opinion (e.g., TA617rev and related
interpretations) clarifies that the definitional section, Article 31(b),
operates before the prohibition in 31(a) is applied.
1.A
document checker must first define the presentation.
2.The
presentation is defined using Article 31(b): Since the two BLs cover
shipment on the same vessel (MV OMG) and same voyage (No. 888)
to the same destination (New York), the presentation of the two BLs
is NOT a partial shipment as per the UCP 600 definition.
3.Once
the presentation is defined as a single shipment, the document
checker then applies the condition from the credit (Article 31(a)).
4.Since
the credit prohibits "partial shipments," and the presentation is
defined as a single shipment, the prohibition is not breached.
Definitive Conclusion (Correct):
The beneficiary's argument, based on Article 31(b), is correct. The
Issuing Bank's refusal, which was solely on the grounds of "Partial
shipment is made and is not allowed in the credit," is wrongful.
The presentation of two B/Ls on the same vessel/voyage/destination does
not constitute a partial shipment under UCP 600, thus the credit's
prohibition is not triggered.
Why the Case Study's Conclusion is Practically Problematic
Your original case study conclusion ("the issuing bank’s refusal is
justified") aligns with a cautious exporter's perspective (i.e.,
to be safe, use one B/L). However, as a CDCS expert checking
documents, the refusal is technically unjustified based on the
UCP 600 text and established ICC rulings.
·The UCP 600 provides the rules of
engagement. If a credit prohibits partial shipment, but the presentation
falls under the exception/definition in 31(b), the bank must honor
the definition.
·The bank's duty is to determine if a partial
shipment was made. Article 31(b) definitively states no
partial shipment was made in this scenario.
Refined CDCS-Level Key Takeaways on the
Case Study
1.Article
31(b) is Definitional: It establishes that certain multi-document
presentations are not partial shipments. This definition applies even
when the credit prohibits partial shipments under Article 31(a).
2.No
Discrepancy Found: The presentation of two B/Ls on the same MV OMG
voyage is considered a single shipment under UCP 600. Since the
credit prohibits partial shipments, and only a single shipment was made (by
UCP definition), the credit term is complied with.
3.Bank
Error: The Issuing Bank's refusal is a classic error of conflating the
operational reality (two sets of documents/loadings) with the UCP's legal
definition of a shipment (single conveyance/journey).
4.Exporter
Caution: While the bank must honor the single shipment, the exporter's
arrangement of two separate B/Ls when "Partial Shipments Not
Allowed" is poor practice. The applicant likely intended
one single document/drawdown. To avoid disputes, the beneficiary should
always aim for a single transport document when partial shipments are
prohibited.
A transshipment is not
a partial shipment.
Transshipment happens after
shipment has occurred, not instead
of it.
Expert
Tip:
An L/C may allow partial shipments but prohibit transshipment, or vice versa.
Each must be evaluated separately during document checking.
7. Case Insight — ICC Opinion TA 617rev
(2007)
This ICC opinion clarified that multiple Bills of Lading issued for the same vessel, same
destination, and same voyagedo not
represent a partial shipment.
The deciding factor is the conveyance, not
the number of documents or onboard dates.
💬Professional Takeaway:
This opinion reinforces Article 31(b) and
remains a cornerstone for CDCS professionals handling multi-document
presentations.
What is partial shipment allowed in LC?
What is an example of a partial shipment?
What is the difference between partial
shipment and split shipment?
What is partially shipped?
Why is partial shipment unable to deliver?
What is the difference between partial shipment
and transshipment?
Note: The article does not mention “unless otherwise stipulated in the credit.” Any restriction comes from the credit itself (field 43P).
UCP 600 Article 31(b): “A presentation consisting of more than one set of transport documents evidencing shipment commencing on the same means of conveyance and for the same journey, provided they indicate the same destination, will not be regarded as covering a partial shipment even if they indicate different dates of shipment or different ports of loading, places of taking in charge or dispatch.”
UCP 600 Article 31(c): “A presentation consisting of one or more sets of transport documents evidencing shipment on more than one means of conveyance within the same mode of transport will be regarded as covering a partial shipment even if the means of conveyance leave on the same day for the same destination.”
Key Point: Partial shipment is determined by physical movement of goods (means of conveyance, journey, destination), not by number of drawings or documents.
2. Partial Drawing (Financial / Monetary Aspect)
UCP 600 Article 14(a): “Presentation of documents in accordance with the terms of the credit is required for the beneficiary to obtain payment, acceptance or negotiation.”
UCP 600 Article 31(a) confirms that partial drawings are allowed.
Key Point: Partial drawing refers to the portion of the credit value being drawn.
Partial shipment does not automatically require a partial drawing.
One presentation can cover multiple shipments; the drawing may be for the total value or partial value.
Multiple transport documents for the same conveyance, journey, and destination do not automatically constitute a partial shipment.
Partial drawing is optional even if multiple shipments are presented.
Key Point: ISBP 821 provides guidance for banks on documentary examination, reinforcing the distinction between shipment and drawing.
Scenario
Partial Shipment?
Partial Drawing?
Comment
Two batches shipped on the same vessel, same voyage, same destination; one presentation covers both batches
❌ No
Optional
Art 31(b) UCP 600 + ISBP 821
Two batches shipped on different vessels, same LC; separate presentations
✅ Yes
✅ Yes
Art 31(c) UCP 600 triggers partial shipment; separate drawing if presented separately
Two shipments on the same vessel, same voyage, same destination; covered by separate sets of transport documents
❌ No
Optional
Art 31(b) UCP 600 + ISBP 821. Separate documents covering goods shipped on the same means of conveyance for the same journey are not deemed partial shipments.
Goods loaded on different trucks at different times to the same final destination, under one single Bill of Lading
❌ No
Optional
This is generally considered one single shipment. Unless the LC prohibits transhipment, transhipment is allowed (Art 21, 22, 23 UCP 600). The single B/L confirms a single contract of carriage.
5. Practical Takeaways for Trade Finance Professionals
Partial shipment ≠ partial drawing.
Always check field 43P of the credit for allowance/prohibition.
Document examination must verify:
Means of conveyance
Voyage/journey
Destination
Whether multiple transport documents reflect the same conveyance/journey/destination
If credit prohibits partial shipments, ensure single presentation evidences one shipment.
Consolidating documents when feasible reduces operational risk, even if partial drawings are allowed.
Summary
Partial shipment: physical movement of goods (UCP 600 Art 31(b–c); ISBP 821 §§31B01–31B03).
Partial drawing: portion of credit value drawn (UCP 600 Art 14(a) & 31(a)).
Rule of thumb: A single presentation can cover multiple shipments; partial drawing is optional and does not depend on partial shipment.
Author Bio
Kazi Suhel Tanvir Mahmudis AVP and Operations Manager at AB Bank, with 24 years of banking experience, including 17 years specialising in trade finance. He has extensive experience in letters of credit, shipping documentation, and international trade compliance. During his career, he has overseen trade-finance operations, managed documentary credits, and ensured compliance with UCP 600 and banking regulations.
