Akredityvo sutarties dalyvių teisinių santykių ypatumai

Abstract

The problems analysed in the article are connected to the legal relations between the parties of
the credit agreement as well as the problems of their regulation. The article analyses in detail legal
relations between the buyer and the beneficiary, the issuing bank and the advising bank as well as
other legal relations that may occur on the grounds of the credit agreement. After examining foreign
literature, as well as analysing the laws of the Republic of Lithuania regulating the payments by a
letter of credit and opposing them to the traditions and rules applied in the international practice of
banks, a suggestion is put forward of how legal relations arising on the grounds of a credit agreement
should be regulated.
After the analysis of the above-mentioned problems, the author makes the following
conclusions.
It is recommended to establish a term on the opening of the letter of credit, as an obligatory
condition of a transaction. According to the author, it is useful to foresee specific conditions for the
buyer’s overdue opening of the letter of credit.
It is suggested for the buyer to grant a right to control of how the bank is meeting the conditions
of the credit agreement. A buyer might refuse to pay the bills in the period of four working days after
he/she has received the documents paid according to the letter of credit, if the advising bank had
breached at least one condition when paying the money to the seller. If in the time of inspection it
would come out that the refusal to pay the bills was grounded, the bank would be obliged to return the
sum of money to the account of the buyer. A rule like this would enhance the buyer’s control in respect
of the advising bank, and at the same time would increase its responsibility to properly carry out the
credit order by a letter of credit and this form of payment would become more attractive to the
potential clients.
It has been established that the legal nature of the relation between the issuing bank and the
advising bank should be considered as the debt transfer.
In the author’s point of view, it would be purposeful to give the issuing bank a possibility to
ensure a right to check the payer’s financial standing to pay the expenditure of the advising bank with
the mediation of the issuing bank, by transferring the additional sum of money to the buyer’s account
in the issuing bank.
It is recommended to establish a direct responsibility of the issuing bank to the beneficiary and
to supplement part 2 of article 6.940 of the existing Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania.
According to the author, it would be purposeful to foresee a preventive measure applied by the
advising bank that would assist in carrying out the control of payer’s actions.