{"id":2010,"date":"2014-06-16T12:49:20","date_gmt":"2014-06-16T11:49:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2010"},"modified":"2016-05-10T12:50:23","modified_gmt":"2016-05-10T11:50:23","slug":"sentence-1216","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2014\/06\/16\/sentence-1216\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1216"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Sentence 1216 &#8211; Assurance corps et moteur d\u2019un bateau de p\u00eache &#8211; Refus d\u2019indemnisation &#8211; Clause en caract\u00e8res non apparents &#8211; Condamnation de l\u2019assureur &#8211; Absence de mesure conservatoire prise par l\u2019assur\u00e9 &#8211; Indemnisation partielle. <\/strong>Suite \u00e0 des avaries subies par un bateau de p\u00eache \u00e0 quai, l\u2019assureur refusait la prise en charge du sinistre sur base des conditions g\u00e9n\u00e9rales du contrat stipulant que la garantie ne pourra trouver application en l\u2019absence du permis de navigation dont ne disposait plus l\u2019assur\u00e9. Bien que la clause consid\u00e9r\u00e9e figur\u00e2t en page 1 du contrat, selon l\u2019article 112-4 du code des assurances qui s\u2019impose aux assurances maritimes depuis 1994 et en application d\u2019une jurisprudence constante, les clauses d\u2019exclusion ou de d\u00e9ch\u00e9ance qui n\u2019apparaissent pas en caract\u00e8res tr\u00e8s apparents sont frapp\u00e9es de nullit\u00e9. L\u2019assureur doit donc indemniser l\u2019assur\u00e9. Mais, en l\u2019absence de mesure conservatoire et en application de l\u2019article 172.23 du m\u00eame Code, l\u2019assur\u00e9 ne peut pr\u00e9tendre \u00e0 des indemnit\u00e9s correspondant \u00e0 l\u2019aggravation des dommages et \u00e0 l\u2019accumulation des frais divers.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sentence 1216 &#8211; Assurance corps et moteur d\u2019un bateau de p\u00eache &#8211; Refus d\u2019indemnisation &#8211; Clause en caract\u00e8res non apparents &#8211; Condamnation de l\u2019assureur &#8211; Absence de mesure conservatoire prise par l\u2019assur\u00e9 &#8211; Indemnisation partielle. Suite \u00e0 des avaries subies par un bateau de p\u00eache \u00e0 quai, l\u2019assureur refusait la prise en charge du sinistre<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"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-2010","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\/2010","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\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2010"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2010\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2011,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2010\/revisions\/2011"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2010"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2010"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2010"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}