District of Columbia Code
Part 1 - General
§ 28:7–306. Altered bills of lading

An unauthorized alteration or filling in of a blank in a bill of lading leaves the bill enforceable according to its original tenor.
(Dec. 30, 1963, 77 Stat. 725, Pub. L. 88-243, § 1; Apr. 27, 2013, D.C. Law 19-299, § 9, 60 DCR 2634.)
1981 Ed., § 28:7-306.
1973 Ed., § 28:7-306.
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Section 16, Uniform Bills of Lading Act.
Changes: Generally revised and simplified; explicit treatment of the situation where a blank in an executed document is filled without authority.
Purposes of Changes: An unauthorized alteration whether made with or without fraudulent intent does not relieve the issuer of his liability on the document as originally executed. Uniform Warehouse Receipts Act 13 excused the issuer from any liability to a fraudulent alterer, other than the liability to deliver the goods according to the terms of the original document. It is difficult to conceive what liability the draftsman intended to excuse. Uniform Bills of Lading Act 16 contains no such excuse provision, and is followed in this respect in the present section. Uniform Bills of Lading Act 16 characterizes an unauthorized alteration as “void” but apparently nothing more was intended than that the alteration did not change the obligation of the issuer. This is sufficiently covered by the terms of this Section. Moreover cases are conceivable in which an alteration would not be “void”; for example, an alteration made by common consent of a transferor and transferee of a document might evidence an enforceable contract between them.
The same rule is made applicable to the filling in of blanks, a matter on which the prior Acts were silent.
Definitional Cross References: “Bill of lading”. Section 1-201.
“Issuer”. Section 7-102.
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Former Section 7-306.
Changes: None
Purposes: An unauthorized alteration or filling in of a blank, whether made with or without fraudulent intent, does not relieve the issuer of its liability on the document as originally executed. This section applies to both tangible and electronic bills of lading, applying the same rule to both types of bills of lading. The control concept of Section 7-106 requires that any changes to the electronic document of title be readily identifiable as authorized or unauthorized. Section 7-306 should be compared to Section 7-208 where a different rule applies to the unauthorized filling in of a blank for tangible warehouse receipts.
Cross Reference:Sections 7-106 and 7-208.
Definitional Cross References: “Bill of lading”. Section 1-201.
“Issuer”. Section 7-102.

Structure District of Columbia Code