Publication Type
Case note/Digest
Publication
Singapore Law Journal (Lexicon)
Publication Date
9-2025
Abstract
This article is a case commentary on the recent Singapore Court of Appeal decision of Kuvera Resources Pte Ltd v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. [2023] 2 SLR 389. It begins with a brief review of the structure of documentary credit transactions before setting out the judgments by the High Court and Court of Appeal. The commentary then examines how both courts rationalised letters of credit within the traditional framework of unilateral contracts, before scrutinising the current position of sanctions clauses within letters of credit. It disagrees with the Court of Appeal’s hesitance towards accepting such clauses, noting that the unilateral nature of the contracts may deprive beneficiaries of opportunities for agreement or negotiation. Nevertheless, it agrees that sanctions clauses potentially undermine the commercial purpose of letters of credit. Finally, the article discusses the practical implications of the case on how banks may continue to view sanctions clauses in letters of credit.
Keywords
letters of credit, sanctions clauses, unilateral contracts, Singapore Court of Appeal, case commentary, banking law, commercial purpose, Kuvera Resources, JPMorgan Chase, documentary credit
Disciplines
Banking and Finance Law | Commercial Law | Contracts
Subject(s)
Applied or Integration/Application Scholarship
ISSN/ISBN
2737-5048
Publisher
SMU Lexicon, SMU School of Law
Copyright Holder
Singapore Management University
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Format
application/PDF
Citation
LAW, Bing Feng, Keith.
Revisiting letters of credit and the enforceability of sanctions clauses: Case comment: Kuvera Resources Pte Ltd v JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.. (2025). Singapore Law Journal (Lexicon). 5, 153-186.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sljlexicon/52
Volume
5
Page
153-186