Bulgrains & Co. Ltd. v. Shinhan Bank
England and Wales High Court of Justice
[2013] EWHC 2498 (QB), Case No: TLQ/13/0593, 24 July 2013 (2013)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
Bulgrains & Co Ltd. (Bulgrains) (plaintiff) was a Bulgarian company that traded wheat and similar foodstuffs. Heungsung Fee Company Limited (Heungsung) contacted Bulgrains looking to buy approximately 3,000 metric tons of wheat-bran pellets. Heungsung requested a letter of credit for the wheat-bran purchase from Shinhan Bank (defendant). Shinhan Bank issued a letter of credit to Heungsung for $825,000. The beneficiary on the line of credit was identified as “Bulgrains Co Limited.” The letter of credit required Shinhan Bank to pay the $825,000 to Bulgrains once Bulgrains had presented several documents to Shinhan Bank’s main office. Bulgrains presented and Shinhan received the documents, but Shinhan Bank alleged that the documents were significantly discrepant. Shinhan Bank refused to pay upon the letter of credit. Bulgrains brought an action against Shinhan Bank seeking to enforce the letter of credit because its failure to pay was wrongful. Shinhan Bank argued that the documents submitted by Bulgrains did not conform to the letter of credit because the name of the beneficiary appeared on the letter as “Bulgrains Co Limited,” whereas the documents presented referred to “Bulgrains & Co Limited.”
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gore, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
