{"id":2141,"date":"2010-12-03T14:26:30","date_gmt":"2010-12-03T13:26:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2141"},"modified":"2016-05-25T13:31:36","modified_gmt":"2016-05-25T12:31:36","slug":"sentence-7","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2010\/12\/03\/sentence-7\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1179"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Sentence 1179 \u2013 Contrats de tonnage &#8211; Clause de Hardship \u2013 Inex\u00e9cution d\u2019une partie des contrats &#8211; Force majeure (non). <\/strong>Pour \u00eatre valable, la notification d\u2019une situation de hardship doit \u00eatre (1) suffisamment pr\u00e9cise (2) donn\u00e9e pendant la p\u00e9riode d\u2019ex\u00e9cution du contrat (3) suivie de la r\u00e9union entre les parties pr\u00e9vue par la clause. Pour un seul des trois contrats partiellement ex\u00e9cut\u00e9s en raison de la crise de la sid\u00e9rurgie, la notification r\u00e9pondait \u00e0 ces exigences mais les conditions de la situation de hardship n\u2019\u00e9taient pas r\u00e9unies non plus que celles de la force majeure car le principal obstacle \u00e0 l\u2019ex\u00e9cution des engagements de l\u2019affr\u00e9teur avait \u00e9t\u00e9 le taux de fret du contrat ce que pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment la clause de hardship \u00e9cartait de son application. L\u2019affr\u00e9teur a \u00e9t\u00e9 condamn\u00e9 \u00e0 indemniser l\u2019armateur de son manque \u00e0 gagner sur la base du diff\u00e9rentiel entre le rendement des contrats et celui du march\u00e9 au moment de l\u2019ex\u00e9cution pr\u00e9vue des voyages sous d\u00e9duction d\u2019une fraction de 25% pour tenir compte des \u00e9l\u00e9ments impond\u00e9rables.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sentence 1179 \u2013 Contrats de tonnage &#8211; Clause de Hardship \u2013 Inex\u00e9cution d\u2019une partie des contrats &#8211; Force majeure (non). Pour \u00eatre valable, la notification d\u2019une situation de hardship doit \u00eatre (1) suffisamment pr\u00e9cise (2) donn\u00e9e pendant la p\u00e9riode d\u2019ex\u00e9cution du contrat (3) suivie de la r\u00e9union entre les parties pr\u00e9vue par la clause. Pour<\/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-2141","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\/2141","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=2141"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2141\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2331,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2141\/revisions\/2331"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2141"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2141"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2141"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}