BR-17: The Payee name (BT-59) shall be provided in the Invoice, if the Payee (BG-10) is…
Peppol BIS Billing 3.0.20 · UBL
Original rule text
[BR-17]-The Payee name (BT-59) shall be provided in the Invoice, if the Payee (BG-10) is different from the Seller (BG-4)
exists(cac:PartyName/cbc:Name) and (not(cac:PartyName/cbc:Name = ../cac:AccountingSupplierParty/cac:Party/cac:PartyName/cbc:Name) and not(cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID = ../cac:AccountingSupplierParty/cac:Party/cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID) )BR-17 is a fatal rule in the business layer of Peppol BIS Billing 3.0.20 · UBL. An invoice that breaks it is rejected. It refers to BT-59, BG-10, BG-4.
What this rule requires
BR-17 requires that if a cac:PayeeParty is present, it must contain a cac:PartyName/cbc:Name element. The test also requires that the payee's name is not equal to the seller's cac:PartyName/cbc:Name, and the payee's cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID (when both parties have one) is not equal to the seller's cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID. A document fails this rule when cac:PayeeParty is present but its name is missing, or when its name or ID matches the seller's corresponding value.
How to fix
If the payee is the same as the seller, remove the cac:PayeeParty element. If there is a different payee, add a cac:PartyName/cbc:Name inside cac:PayeeParty, and make sure that this name differs from the seller's cac:AccountingSupplierParty/cac:Party/cac:PartyName/cbc:Name. Also ensure that cac:PayeeParty/cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID (if both parties have an ID) is not the same as the seller's cac:AccountingSupplierParty/cac:Party/cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID.
Guidance on this rule. The original text above is authoritative.
Where to go next
No published Peppol BIS Billing UBL release comparison lists a change to BR-17.
Validate an invoice against these rules · All release changes