{"id":2897,"date":"1997-11-24T13:18:17","date_gmt":"1997-11-24T12:18:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=2897"},"modified":"2016-05-31T13:19:03","modified_gmt":"2016-05-31T12:19:03","slug":"sentence-973","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/1997\/11\/24\/sentence-973\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 973"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 973 – Gencon – Convention Bruxelles 1924 – Perte totale du navire et sa cargaison par naufrage – circonstances mal \u00e9claircies – Recours de l’assureur subrog\u00e9 dans les droits du porteur connaissement – Comp\u00e9tence – Identit\u00e9 du transporteur – cas except\u00e9 innavigabilit\u00e9 soudaine (superveniens) – Preuve de la diligence raisonnable du transporteur – fautes reproch\u00e9es – exon\u00e9ration du transporteur (oui). <\/strong>Naufrage par mauvais temps – perte totale – tr\u00e8s probablement innavigabilit\u00e9 soudaine par envahissement en raison d’une br\u00eache \u00e0 l’avant o\u00f9 le navire \u00e9tait \u00e0 simple coque. D\u00e9faut d’investiture des arbitres (non) – connaissement faisant r\u00e9f\u00e9rence \u00e0 une charte-partie \u2013 transporteur responsable ayant appos\u00e9 son cachet commercial sur le connaissement – Paramount clause rendant applicable la Convention de Bruxelles 1924 – diligences raisonnables – fautes graves reproch\u00e9es : aucune preuve de l’innavigabilit\u00e9 soudaine, absence de syst\u00e8me d’alarme, composition de l’\u00e9quipage et organisation du travail \u00e0 bord – armateur fond\u00e9 \u00e0 se pr\u00e9valoir du cas except\u00e9 de l’art.4 \u00a71 de la Convention.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 973 – Gencon – Convention Bruxelles 1924 – Perte totale du navire et sa cargaison par naufrage – circonstances mal \u00e9claircies – Recours de l’assureur subrog\u00e9 dans les droits du porteur connaissement – Comp\u00e9tence – Identit\u00e9 du transporteur – cas except\u00e9 innavigabilit\u00e9 soudaine (superveniens) – Preuve de la diligence raisonnable du transporteur – fautes<\/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-2897","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\/2897","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=2897"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2897\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2898,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2897\/revisions\/2898"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}