{"id":2655,"date":"2001-01-16T11:34:44","date_gmt":"2001-01-16T10:34:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2655"},"modified":"2016-05-30T11:35:55","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T10:35:55","slug":"sentence-1044","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2001\/01\/16\/sentence-1044\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1044"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Sentence 1044 \u2013 c\/p Gencon &#8211; pommes de terre &#8211; immobilisation du navire au d\u00e9chargement &#8211; retard pr\u00e9tendument imputable au destinataire &#8211; opposabilit\u00e9 de la convention d&rsquo;arbitrage au destinataire (non) &#8211; demande de mise en cause de ce dernier rejet\u00e9e &#8211; condamnation de l&rsquo;affr\u00e9teur aux frais d&rsquo;immobilisation. <\/strong>Accostage au port de d\u00e9chargement retard\u00e9 puis apr\u00e8s accostage nouveau retard en raison de formalit\u00e9s douani\u00e8res &#8211; l&rsquo;affr\u00e9teur soutient que les frais d&rsquo;immobilisation doivent \u00eatre support\u00e9s par le destinataire \u00e0 qui la c\/p est opposable &#8211; le porteur de bonne foi d&rsquo;un connaissement \u00e9mis dans le cadre d&rsquo;un affr\u00e8tement ne peut se voir opposer une clause de la c\/p qui n&rsquo;a fait une acceptation certaine de sa part.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sentence 1044 \u2013 c\/p Gencon &#8211; pommes de terre &#8211; immobilisation du navire au d\u00e9chargement &#8211; retard pr\u00e9tendument imputable au destinataire &#8211; opposabilit\u00e9 de la convention d&rsquo;arbitrage au destinataire (non) &#8211; demande de mise en cause de ce dernier rejet\u00e9e &#8211; condamnation de l&rsquo;affr\u00e9teur aux frais d&rsquo;immobilisation. Accostage au port de d\u00e9chargement retard\u00e9 puis apr\u00e8s<\/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-2655","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\/2655","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=2655"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2655\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2656,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2655\/revisions\/2656"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2655"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2655"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2655"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}