{"id":2147,"date":"2010-10-18T14:31:56","date_gmt":"2010-10-18T13:31:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2147"},"modified":"2016-05-25T13:33:51","modified_gmt":"2016-05-25T12:33:51","slug":"sentence-9","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2010\/10\/18\/sentence-9\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1177"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Sentence 1177 \u2013 Contrat de construction d\u2019un navire de plaisance \u2013 Nullit\u00e9 pour dol (non) &#8211; Expertise (non<\/strong>). La d\u00e9couverte par l\u2019armateur, plusieurs mois apr\u00e8s la livraison du navire, que la construction de la coque avait d\u00e9but\u00e9 six ans avant la signature du contrat ne constitue pas un dol dans la mesure o\u00f9, d\u2019une part, le caract\u00e8re intentionnel de ce manque d\u2019information n\u2019est pas clairement d\u00e9montr\u00e9 et, d\u2019autre part, il n\u2019est aucunement \u00e9tabli que les dysfonctionnements constat\u00e9s sont li\u00e9s \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e2ge de la construction. La d\u00e9signation d\u2019un expert ne s\u2019impose pas puisqu\u2019en cas de litige technique, le contrat pr\u00e9voit explicitement l\u2019arbitrage de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 de classification. Le Tribunal arbitral d\u00e9boute les parties de leurs demandes et ordonne le partage par moiti\u00e9 des frais et honoraires.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sentence 1177 \u2013 Contrat de construction d\u2019un navire de plaisance \u2013 Nullit\u00e9 pour dol (non) &#8211; Expertise (non). La d\u00e9couverte par l\u2019armateur, plusieurs mois apr\u00e8s la livraison du navire, que la construction de la coque avait d\u00e9but\u00e9 six ans avant la signature du contrat ne constitue pas un dol dans la mesure o\u00f9, d\u2019une part,<\/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-2147","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\/2147","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=2147"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2147\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2332,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2147\/revisions\/2332"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}