Case study
1. Standard for examination
According to the Sub-Article 13(a) of U.C.P., the standard for examination for the documents requested by the bank's credit has to be determined based on the International Standard Banking Practice. It regulates that the contradictions of the documents' context can be regarded as a discrepancy. The international Standard Banking Practice is the standard for examination in this case and according to the I.C.C. bank committee's note, the Standard Banking Practice in credit has to be "the most honest, skillful and predictable practices".

Examples of International Standard Banking Practice
1) Miss typed address in the original B/L and missing square in a stamp is not discrepancy.
2) It is possible to indicate product details in general terminology that would not create discrepancy against a credit on all kinds of documents other than a commercial invoice (I.C.C. pub 459 case No.43).
3) If there is no stamp or category number on a credit, it is discrepancy to the original B/L and stamp category number of origin certificate. This can not be rejected or accepted.(I.C.C. pub 459 case No.199)
4) It is regarded as a discrepancy If 40PKGS (bags) is indicated in the original B/L and 40M/TONS(metric ton) in the commercial invoice.(I.C.C. pub 489 case No.200)
5) It can be regarded as a discrepancy if 4 of the commercial invoices out of 5 are indicating the weight of products as 85,162MT and 88,162MT on one. (I.C.C. pub 489 case No.202)

2. Discrepancy
According to the Sub-Article 13(a) of the U.C.P., this case can be regarded as a discrepancy because the weight unit on the credit is indicated as MT(metric tons) but the weight unit on the original B/L is in kg.
The banks have no responsibility to accurately convert the units of metric tons, tons and kgs.
A decimal points (,), period(.) and a half point (,) discrepancies are not regarded as a discrepancy documents. (I.C.C. pub 459 case No.40)

Conclusion
It is reasonable to reject payment for this case because the case can be regarded as a discrepancy documents.

Case 2
Bank "D" has received a documentary credit issued dated on May 13th. The shipping terms of the credit was C&F(Existing, CFR term). The bank processed NEGO the shipping documents on May 30th, but the original B/L, insurance documents and all the other documents were dated as May 8th.
After negotiated the documents the bank submitted it to the opening bank but rejected the payment declaring that the coverage date of insurance is discrepancy. The bank "D" insisted on the rejection since the insurance policy is not a document required by the credit.

Case study
1. Documents not requested by a credit
According to the Sub-Article 13(a) of the U.C.P., it stipulates "A bank don't examinate a document that is not regulated in a credit". And it also stipulates if "received such documents, it should be returned to the sender or sent back to the sender without further responsibility".

2. Discrepancy of a document that was never requested
A bank has no responsibility to examine a credit that was never requested by a credit. Therefore, a bank can not reject entire documents just because such documents contains discrepant details to the credit. (I.C.C. pub 489 case No.204)

Case 3
On the cover of the shipping documents reads that the sender is sending a document as a approval based according to the U.C.P regulation, so a bank never rejected the payment thinking that the documents were sent as collection. 2 weeks after receiving documents, notified payment rejection to the negotiating bank but a reply came back saying they deny rejection because the time period for the examination of documents was expired. As of a result a dispute occurred whether the time period for the examination is applicable to approval base.

Case study
1. The time period for the shipping documents examination
According to the U.C.P. 500, The issuing Bank. have a reasonable time not to exceed seven banking days following the day of receipt of the document. (The Sub-Article 13(b) of U.C.P.). Accordingly, the time period for the shipping documents examination by the opening bank should be done within seven banking days from the date received the shipping documents.

2. The details of approval base
The approval base means, when a negotiating bank sends documents with collection request because there is a discrepancy with documents which a seller has submitted under the reserve so that a opening bank to get an admission from a opening requester. The meaning of approval base has different meaning from collection base where it represents a letter of guarantee or letter or reserve. The U.C.P. is applicable in this case so it has to follow the time period for the examination regulated by the U.C.P.

3. The difference of approval base and collection base
In a broad sense, the approval base include collection base however, it allows a letter of guarantee negotiation using approval base while applying U.C.P. Accordingly, if a cover of the shipping document indicates that is follows the U.C.P. it should be interpreted as a letter of guarantee and if it indicates the U.C.P. applicable about collection, it should be interpreted as a collection base. (A judicial precedent of the U.S. : Alaska Textile co., Inc v. Lloyed williams Fashion case 777 sup 1139).

Conclusion
Even though it advent a shipping document as approval base it indicates "We send you the documents for approval under reference to U.C.P. 500". So it is applicable with the Sub-Article 13(b) of U.C.P., the shipping documents have to be examined within the seven banking days from the document was field. (I.C.C. More case study on documentary credit 1991. p48-50).