Fluormatic Corporation See Case 16-1 (Fluormatic Corporation

Fluormatic CorporationThe evidence provided by Fluormatic is deemed to be unacceptable. There is a breach in the terms and conditions that pertain to negotiating for the instruments presented to DIF Bank. Fluormatic Corporation argues that the drafts presented at DIF Bank are not negotiable as they are not payable in a “sum certain” just as stated in section 3-104 and 3-106 of the Code. In reference to the case study, it is said that the drafts while payable in German deutsche marks;did not have a specific rate of exchange (Kubasek, N. et al. 2013).Fluormatic goes on to say that, at the time, the drafts were not payable in “a sum certain” as required under section 3-104 and 3-106 of the Code.If Fluormatic Corporation had followed what Section 3-107(2) of the UCC states, ‘A promise of order to pay a sum stated in a foreign currency is for a sum certain in money and, unless a different medium of payment is specified in the instrument, may be satisfied by payment of that number of dollars which the stated foreign currency will purchase at the buying sight rate for that currency on the day on which the instrument in payable or,