{"id":2484,"date":"2004-06-25T09:40:28","date_gmt":"2004-06-25T08:40:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2484"},"modified":"2016-05-27T09:40:59","modified_gmt":"2016-05-27T08:40:59","slug":"sentence-1099","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2004\/06\/25\/sentence-1099\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1099"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Sentence 1099 \u2013 Pluralit\u00e9 de parties et de contrats. <\/strong>Loi applicable. Echouement. Clauses de port s\u00fbr. Avaries communes. Les lois nationales applicables dans les diff\u00e9rents contrats n\u2019ont pas directement vocation \u00e0 r\u00e9gler les questions pos\u00e9es, les solutions passant avant tout par l\u2019application des clauses contractuelles et les usages reconnus en mati\u00e8re de port s\u00fbr ou les r\u00e8gles d\u2019York et d\u2019Anvers. L\u2019absence de balisage d\u2019un haut fond rend le port consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme non s\u00fbr. La partie qui a garanti la s\u00fbret\u00e9 du port doit assumer les cons\u00e9quences financi\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00e9chouement qu\u2019il soit suivant les contrats affr\u00e9teur \u00e0 temps ou affr\u00e9teur au voyage. En mati\u00e8re d\u2019avarie commune, la demande du propri\u00e9taire du navire \u00e0 l\u2019encontre du destinataire de la cargaison et de ses assureurs est recevable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sentence 1099 \u2013 Pluralit\u00e9 de parties et de contrats. Loi applicable. Echouement. Clauses de port s\u00fbr. Avaries communes. Les lois nationales applicables dans les diff\u00e9rents contrats n\u2019ont pas directement vocation \u00e0 r\u00e9gler les questions pos\u00e9es, les solutions passant avant tout par l\u2019application des clauses contractuelles et les usages reconnus en mati\u00e8re de port s\u00fbr ou<\/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-2484","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\/2484","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=2484"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2484\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2485,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2484\/revisions\/2485"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2484"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2484"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2484"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}