{"id":2774,"date":"1999-05-14T14:26:17","date_gmt":"1999-05-14T13:26:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2774"},"modified":"2016-05-30T14:26:43","modified_gmt":"2016-05-30T13:26:43","slug":"sentence-1006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/1999\/05\/14\/sentence-1006\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 1006"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1006 \u2013 Gencon – Fr\u00e9teur non identifi\u00e9 jusqu’\u00e0 la fin voyage – Affr\u00e9teur incorrectement identifi\u00e9 – Obligation de l’arbitre de v\u00e9rifier l’existence et la validit\u00e9 de la convention d’arbitrage – charte r\u00e9dig\u00e9e tardivement , non sign\u00e9e, sans int\u00e9r\u00eat – contrat affr\u00e8tement l\u00e9gitim\u00e9 \u00e0 post\u00e9riori par son ex\u00e9cution – avarie cargaison par mouille eau de mer – manque \u00e9tanch\u00e9it\u00e9 panneaux – responsabilit\u00e9 fr\u00e9teur (oui) –<\/strong> Validit\u00e9 de la clause compromissoire – fr\u00e9teur et affr\u00e9teur bien identifi\u00e9s – copie de charte non sign\u00e9e sans int\u00e9r\u00eat dans le d\u00e9bat – contrat repr\u00e9sent\u00e9 par r\u00e9capitulation des termes de l’affr\u00e8tement – avarie marchandises – expertise contradictoire – manque d’\u00e9tanch\u00e9it\u00e9 des panneaux, joints manquants – mauvais temps cas except\u00e9 (non) – innavigabilit\u00e9 fautive (oui) – droit des assureurs subrog\u00e9s \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0ne peuvent \u00eatre sup\u00e9rieurs \u00e0 ceux de l’assur\u00e9.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 1006 \u2013 Gencon – Fr\u00e9teur non identifi\u00e9 jusqu’\u00e0 la fin voyage – Affr\u00e9teur incorrectement identifi\u00e9 – Obligation de l’arbitre de v\u00e9rifier l’existence et la validit\u00e9 de la convention d’arbitrage – charte r\u00e9dig\u00e9e tardivement , non sign\u00e9e, sans int\u00e9r\u00eat – contrat affr\u00e8tement l\u00e9gitim\u00e9 \u00e0 post\u00e9riori par son ex\u00e9cution – avarie cargaison par mouille eau de<\/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-2774","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\/2774","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=2774"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2774\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2775,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2774\/revisions\/2775"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2774"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2774"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2774"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}