{"id":2747,"date":"1999-10-20T13:52:17","date_gmt":"1999-10-20T12:52:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2747"},"modified":"2016-05-30T13:52:48","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T12:52:48","slug":"sentence-1015","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/1999\/10\/20\/sentence-1015\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1015"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1015 \u2013 Protocole de cession de parts sociales – acte sous seing priv\u00e9 et authentique – Renonciation \u00e0 acquisition – validit\u00e9 du protocole – article 1134 et 1583 Code civil – Indemnisation pour r\u00e9ticence dolosive – Illic\u00e9it\u00e9 pour abus de biens sociaux – ex\u00e9cution forc\u00e9e – lev\u00e9e de cautions personnelles – perte de chance – mesure d’astreinte (non) – Art. 700 et non r\u00e8glement provision consignation. Urgence.<\/strong> Dans un protocole sous seing priv\u00e9 l’associ\u00e9 majoritaire a c\u00e9d\u00e9 ses parts sociales \u00e0 une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 holding en vue d’une reprise de sauvegarde de l’activit\u00e9 de lignes r\u00e9guli\u00e8res et de son d\u00e9veloppement avec le c\u00e9dant. R\u00e9it\u00e9ration authentique – renonciation \u00e0 acquisition et refus d’authentification en raison situation financi\u00e8re du c\u00e9dant – demande de r\u00e9duction de prix en cours d’instance – mesure d’astreinte exc\u00e9dant pouvoir des arbitres.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1015 \u2013 Protocole de cession de parts sociales – acte sous seing priv\u00e9 et authentique – Renonciation \u00e0 acquisition – validit\u00e9 du protocole – article 1134 et 1583 Code civil – Indemnisation pour r\u00e9ticence dolosive – Illic\u00e9it\u00e9 pour abus de biens sociaux – ex\u00e9cution forc\u00e9e – lev\u00e9e de cautions personnelles – perte de chance<\/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-2747","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\/2747","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=2747"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2747\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2748,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2747\/revisions\/2748"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2747"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2747"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2747"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}