{"id":2667,"date":"2000-11-20T11:44:14","date_gmt":"2000-11-20T10:44:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2667"},"modified":"2016-05-30T11:44:43","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T10:44:43","slug":"sentence-1040","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2000\/11\/20\/sentence-1040\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1040"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1040 \u2013 c\/p Synacomex 90 – orge en vrac – clause de gr\u00e8ve – attente du navire pour congestion portuaire due \u00e0 mouvements de gr\u00e8ve des manutentionnaires – d\u00e9finition de la gr\u00e8ve – cessation partielle ou totale du travail – qualification des faits – situation du navire en attente similaire \u00e0 celle du navire \u00e0 quai – \u00e9tat des faits seul document probant permettant calcul des surestaries. <\/strong>Navire en attente sur rade – d’apr\u00e8s une attestation du Port :\u00a0\u00bbles op\u00e9rations ont \u00e9t\u00e9 perturb\u00e9es durant la p\u00e9riode du 28 D\u00e9cembre au 9 Janvier pour cause de gr\u00e8ve\u00a0\u00bb – il n’y a gr\u00e8ve au sens de la clause que si l’arr\u00eat de travail est total – l’\u00e9tat des faits montre qu’il y a eu des arr\u00eats partiels et des arr\u00eats complets – calcul du temps utilis\u00e9 et des surestaries selon les indications de l’\u00e9tat des faits – clause de gr\u00e8ve s’applique \u00e9galement au navire en attente qui a remis sa notice car les staries courent comme s’il \u00e9tait \u00e0 quai et un arr\u00eat complet du travail doit donc les interrompre.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1040 \u2013 c\/p Synacomex 90 – orge en vrac – clause de gr\u00e8ve – attente du navire pour congestion portuaire due \u00e0 mouvements de gr\u00e8ve des manutentionnaires – d\u00e9finition de la gr\u00e8ve – cessation partielle ou totale du travail – qualification des faits – situation du navire en attente similaire \u00e0 celle du navire<\/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-2667","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\/2667","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=2667"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2667\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2668,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2667\/revisions\/2668"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2667"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2667"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2667"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}