{"id":1904,"date":"2014-05-11T14:23:20","date_gmt":"2014-05-11T13:23:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=1904"},"modified":"2016-05-25T13:29:35","modified_gmt":"2016-05-25T12:29:35","slug":"sentence-n-1209","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2014\/05\/11\/sentence-n-1209\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1209"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>C\/P Synacomex 90 &#8211; Farine de bl\u00e9 en sacs &#8211; Dommages \u00e0 cargaison &#8211; Assureurs subrog\u00e9s &#8211; Recevabilit\u00e9 (oui) <\/strong><br \/>\nLes assureurs ayant fourni tous les documents propres \u00e0 justifier la validit\u00e9 de la subrogation, leur demande a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9clar\u00e9e recevable. Sur le fond, les demandeurs soutenaient que des sacs avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 endommag\u00e9s \u00e0 bord du fait d\u2019entr\u00e9es d\u2019eau par des joints de panneaux de cale alors que le d\u00e9fendeur leur opposait que les avaries r\u00e9sultaient d\u2019averses de pluie durant le d\u00e9chargement.<\/p>\n<p>Les arbitres ont rappel\u00e9 que selon la clause 5 de la charte la marchandise devait \u00eatre d\u00e9charg\u00e9e aux frais et risques des affr\u00e9teurs et que la charge de la preuve incombait aux demandeurs. Or, aux termes du rapport d\u2019expertise, rien ne permettait d\u2019affirmer que le dommage \u00e9tait survenu en cours de voyage. Les demandeurs ont donc \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9bout\u00e9s.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>C\/P Synacomex 90 &#8211; Farine de bl\u00e9 en sacs &#8211; Dommages \u00e0 cargaison &#8211; Assureurs subrog\u00e9s &#8211; Recevabilit\u00e9 (oui) Les assureurs ayant fourni tous les documents propres \u00e0 justifier la validit\u00e9 de la subrogation, leur demande a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9clar\u00e9e recevable. Sur le fond, les demandeurs soutenaient que des sacs avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 endommag\u00e9s \u00e0 bord du<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1904","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-non-classe-fr"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1904","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1904"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1904\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2329,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1904\/revisions\/2329"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1904"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1904"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1904"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}