{"id":2642,"date":"2001-02-12T11:15:03","date_gmt":"2001-02-12T10:15:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2642"},"modified":"2016-05-30T11:16:06","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T10:16:06","slug":"sentence-1048","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2001\/02\/12\/sentence-1048\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1048"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1048 \u2013 c\/p Synacomex – riz en vrac -sous affr\u00e8tement par courtier affr\u00e9teur – exceptions irrecevabilit\u00e9 – sentence avant dire droit – incomp\u00e9tence (non) – d\u00e9faut int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e0 agir (non) – qualification de l’intervention du courtier mandataire (non) ou affr\u00e9teur (oui) – avaries cargaison dues au r\u00e9chauffement<\/strong> au contact des ballasts \u00e0 combustibles – responsabilit\u00e9 fr\u00e9teur (oui). <\/strong>Navire pris en affr\u00e8tement par un courtier qui l’a aussit\u00f4t sous-fr\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 un client qui obtiendra r\u00e9paration pour avaries – action r\u00e9cursoire du courtier contre son fr\u00e9teur et armateur propri\u00e9taire – exceptions d’irrecevabilit\u00e9 pour d\u00e9faut de notification de l’acte introductif d’arbitrage, pour incomp\u00e9tence au motif que le courtier affirmait avoir agi dans le cadre d’un mandat, pour d\u00e9faut d’int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e0 agir, rejet\u00e9es – responsabilit\u00e9s doivent \u00eatre appr\u00e9ci\u00e9es selon la c\/p – avaries dues r\u00e9chauffement marchandise au contact des soutes \u00e0 combustibles – responsabilit\u00e9 fr\u00e9teur (oui) – calcul du pr\u00e9judice sur base valeur marchandise au jour de son arriv\u00e9e \u00e0 destination.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1048 \u2013 c\/p Synacomex – riz en vrac -sous affr\u00e8tement par courtier affr\u00e9teur – exceptions irrecevabilit\u00e9 – sentence avant dire droit – incomp\u00e9tence (non) – d\u00e9faut int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e0 agir (non) – qualification de l’intervention du courtier mandataire (non) ou affr\u00e9teur (oui) – avaries cargaison dues au r\u00e9chauffement au contact des ballasts \u00e0 combustibles –<\/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-2642","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\/2642","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=2642"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2642\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2643,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2642\/revisions\/2643"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2642"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2642"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2642"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}