On 8 June, an article from Hannaford Turner says that there has been concern for many years amongst trade finance practitioners and corporates dealing with LC that both the autonomy and irrevocability of LC are at risk of being undermined through the increasing use of a varied range of sanction clauses.  It says that it is accepted, certainly as a matter of English law, that sanctions (if they apply) override obligations under LC, such that the financial institution may be prevented from making payment regardless of the terms of the LC.  For that reason, it says, there are 2 key questions to be considered when considering the impact of sanctions on an LC transaction.  It warns that it cannot be assumed that any liability of the institution to make a payment under the LC is extinguished once the sanctions clause bites; the clause may simply have the effect of suspending the payment obligation for the period that the prohibition remains in place9 and limiting consequential liability, e.g. due to delay.


Any modest contributions for my time and ongoing expenses are welcomed!  I have a page where you can do so, and where one-off contributions start as low as $3, at



Author: raytodd2017

Chartered Legal Executive and former senior manager with Isle of Man Customs and Excise, where I was (amongst other things) Sanctions Officer (for UN/EU sanctions), Export Licensing Officer and Manager of the Legal-Library & Collectorate Support Section

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: