{"id":2732,"date":"1999-11-25T13:40:35","date_gmt":"1999-11-25T12:40:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2732"},"modified":"2016-05-30T13:41:06","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T12:41:06","slug":"sentence-1020","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/1999\/11\/25\/sentence-1020\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1020"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1020 \u2013 Gencon – f\u00e9raille en vrac – affr\u00e9teur \u00e9galement vendeur CIF – manquant \u00e0 l’arriv\u00e9e selon certificat douanes – d\u00e9duction de la valeur des manquants sur facture – article 1165 Code Civil – contrat vente non opposable – clause 2 Gencon – armateur non responsable du manquant – preuve de sa n\u00e9gligence (non). <\/strong>Affr\u00e9teur fondait sa demande sur contrat de vente duquel il r\u00e9sultait que l’acheteur ne paye que la valeur des marchandises d\u00e9livr\u00e9es au vu certificat de douanes \u00e0 destination – non opposabilit\u00e9 du contrat de vente – clause 2 de la Gencon – manquant n’\u00e9tait imputable ni \u00e0 arrimage impropre ni \u00e0 un manquement du fr\u00e9teur \u00e0 son obligation de diligence \u00e0 mettre le navire en bon \u00e9tat de navigabilit\u00e9 ni \u00e0 sa faute personnelle – de plus certificat des douanes \u00e9tabli tardivement – fr\u00e9teur n’assume pas les engagements d’un transporteur de marchandises par mer.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1020 \u2013 Gencon – f\u00e9raille en vrac – affr\u00e9teur \u00e9galement vendeur CIF – manquant \u00e0 l’arriv\u00e9e selon certificat douanes – d\u00e9duction de la valeur des manquants sur facture – article 1165 Code Civil – contrat vente non opposable – clause 2 Gencon – armateur non responsable du manquant – preuve de sa n\u00e9gligence (non).<\/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-2732","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\/2732","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=2732"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2732\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2733,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2732\/revisions\/2733"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}