Page 240 - DMGT546_INTERNATIONAL_TRADE_PROCEDURE_AND_DOCUMENTATION

Unit 10: Containerization and Leasing Practices

Police Investigation Notes
Initial attempts to contact the two Police detectives investigating the case were unsuccessful.
We were subsequently advised that following a disciplinary enquiry, both detectives had
been transferred out of the Police unit responsible for investigating matters of this nature.
A special Police task force, financed by local business interests, had been set up with a brief
to investigate not only this alleged theft but also various other similar and possibly
connected thefts of containers. We met with detectives assigned to the task force in
Johannesburg.
They advised us that container theft in South Africa, as in other parts of the world, was
believed to be the work of organised crime syndicates, some with international links.
Outwardly respectable businessmen, Customs officials and policemen were believed to
be involved in the criminal activities of the syndicates.
The detectives advised us that it would not be in their interests or ours for them to share
any information with us. All the detectives were prepared to say was that Mr X was known
to them, and was being sought by them in regard to the matter of the ten containers.
Restatement of Facts
It is clear from the following restatement of facts that the movement of the containers was
orchestrated as follows:
1. The shipper appeared to have believed that he had sold the goods to a buyer in
Durban, South Africa. Freight was prepaid and insurance was taken out by the
shipper.
2. The purported buyer was intended to receive the relevant original documentation
on a “cash against documents” basis, the original documents being held by three
South African banks
3. The goods were packed into ten 40' containers which were loaded onboard two
vessels in South-East Asia. The containers were transshipped onto five vessels at
Singapore for onward carriage to Durban.
4. The containers were landed at the Container Terminal in Durban. The initial
movement of the containers was controlled by the shipping line’s Durban agents.
5. The initial sale between the shipper and the purported buyer (if there was in fact a
sale, which is doubtful) apparently fell through, and the shipper intended that the
containers should be held in bond pending the re-negotiation of the sale.
6. During these negotiations, the containers were uplifted by various road transport
companies and delivered to premises outside Johannesburg.
7. Fraudulent Customs documents were prepared and presented to the Container
Terminal in order for the containers to be uplifted.
8. The original sale documents, specifically the original Bills of Lading, were never released
by the banks. There was evidence to suggest that the shipping line’s Durban agents had
released the containers without the presentation of the original Bills of Lading.
9. In every instance, the road transport instructions were issued by a single road transport
brokerage, which was in turn acting in accordance with verbal instructions received
from a Mr X. The deliveries were all undertaken on a “cash on delivery” basis.
10. There was no firm evidence to suggest that the purported buyer had received the
goods. Similarly, there was no firm evidence to suggest that he was directly involved
in the disappearance of the containers.
Question:
Discuss the importance of custom documentation in detail.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 235