{"id":2297,"date":"2007-02-26T12:39:30","date_gmt":"2007-02-26T11:39:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2297"},"modified":"2016-05-25T13:21:54","modified_gmt":"2016-05-25T12:21:54","slug":"sentence-51","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2007\/02\/26\/sentence-51\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1135"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Sentence 1135\u00a0\u2013 2d degr\u00e9 \u2013 Intervention d&rsquo;un remorqueur aupr\u00e8s d&rsquo;un navire \u00e9chou\u00e9 en rivi\u00e8re \u2013 simple service de remorquage et non pas acte d&rsquo;assistance. <\/strong>A la suite d\u2019un \u00e9chouement en Seine caus\u00e9 par une d\u00e9faillance du moteur principal, un navire roulier r\u00e9ussit n\u00e9anmoins un amarrage de fortune \u00e0 un appontement proche. Il demande la pr\u00e9sence d\u2019un remorqueur en attendant le flot puis r\u00e9ussit avec l\u2019aide du remorqueur et de son propulseur d\u2019\u00e9trave \u00e0 se d\u00e9s\u00e9chouer. Il reprend alors sa route, sa machine ayant \u00e9t\u00e9 remise en \u00e9tat pendant l\u2019\u00e9chouement. Les arbitre ont refus\u00e9 de qualifier l\u2019action du remorqueur d\u2019assistance estimant qu\u2019il n\u2019y a jamais eu de danger ni pour le navire ni pour la cargaison et qu\u2019il ne s\u2019agit que d\u2019un service de remorquage et de surveillance de flot.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sentence 1135\u00a0\u2013 2d degr\u00e9 \u2013 Intervention d&rsquo;un remorqueur aupr\u00e8s d&rsquo;un navire \u00e9chou\u00e9 en rivi\u00e8re \u2013 simple service de remorquage et non pas acte d&rsquo;assistance. A la suite d\u2019un \u00e9chouement en Seine caus\u00e9 par une d\u00e9faillance du moteur principal, un navire roulier r\u00e9ussit n\u00e9anmoins un amarrage de fortune \u00e0 un appontement proche. Il demande la pr\u00e9sence<\/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-2297","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\/2297","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=2297"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2297\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2321,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2297\/revisions\/2321"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2297"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2297"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2297"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}