Miriam will send out the related materials on other available technologies that dematerialise bills of lading
David highlighted the importance of standardization so as not to have multiple rulebooks.
Lance reminded that the scope of the MLETR White Paper which is on electronic transferable records. It is alright to discuss about the technologies available but not in detail on Quantum Computing. Preferably a separate project on Quantum Computing if required in future.
Sin Yong also opined on the project scope to focus on title transfer and not only solely on eBL.
Sue Probert shared that there will be a new UN/CEFACT project proposal that covers on Negotiable and non- Negotiable titles.
Form's requirements: semantics of the data fields when porting from paper to paperless
Guidance on interpretation of transferable records: From a legal point of view. What requirements do we need in order to accept the title function?
Lance explained that the focus should be on the Negotiable Title Transfer (by using eBL). However, other documents can be used as long as it is a Negotiable Title Transfer.
Lance also pointed out that it is not transfer of document but transfer of records in this project scope.
Sin Yong shared on 2 points:
Need to be clear about the term Negotiable Documents and Document of Title. Are these the same or different? Suggestion is to provide clarity in this area.
When an eBL solution is implemented, the transfer from end-to-end can be quite challenging. And under MLETR scope, it allows the conversion from paper to electronic and vice versa. Thus, it would be advisable to include a section to discuss on issuance of document from paper to digital and vice versa.
Luca opined on one purpose of the MLETR which is to avoid recourse to domestic legal notions such as "novation": that’s the effect of functional equivalence.
Miriam shared the differences in treatment of the bill of lading as a document of title under common law.
David shared that Principle of novation doesn’t work under German Law
Sue Probert suggested that the paper cover potential difficulties if a switch to paper is needed at some point during the information flows and cite past experiences from the existing eBL solutions
5 min
Walk through of Jacob feedback
Clarifications on Jacob’s feedback
Soundbites: refers to the format of the documents. If the deliverable can be made more attractive using multimedia such as interviews instead of White Paper.
It has been clarified that the deliverable will bea White Paper.
10 min
Walk through of draft ToC
Action items
Miriam Goldby to provide related materials on other available technologies that dematerialise bills of lading.
Ren Yuh Kay or Shujing Liew to send draft ToC to all UN/CEFACT Experts participating in Transfer of MLETR-compliant titles.
By , everyone to provide their reviews on the NOM for 08-Apr-2020 UN/CEFACT MLETR Working Group Meeting. Please send feedback via email ([email protected] and [email protected])
By , everyone to provide their feedback on the draft ToC Version 0.1. Please send feedback via email ([email protected] and [email protected])
Which areas should remain in the ToC
Which areas should NOT be in this White Paper (can be considered under a separate project)
Which additional areas should be added to the ToC
If you are interested to contribute through the authoring of a particular area, do please indicate accordingly
For those not registered as UN/CEFACT Experts, to do so soonest as future NOM and related documents will only be available in UN/CEFACT CUE.
Next conference call to be scheduled in 3 weeks’ time (Week of 4-May-2020)
