{"id":4773,"date":"1985-05-30T09:08:34","date_gmt":"1985-05-30T08:08:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=4773"},"modified":"2016-08-23T09:09:15","modified_gmt":"2016-08-23T08:09:15","slug":"sentence-578","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/1985\/05\/30\/sentence-578\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 578"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 578 – Gencon – clause 2 – avarie et manquant – manque de due diligence – allongement du voyage – qualit\u00e9 pour agir \u2013 prescription. <\/strong>Affr\u00e8tement au voyage – Connaissements \u00e9mis par l’affr\u00e9teur \u00e0 l’ordre du chargeur r\u00e9el – Action intent\u00e9e par l’affr\u00e9teur – Irrecevabilit\u00e9 en l’absence de subrogation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 578 – Gencon – clause 2 – avarie et manquant – manque de due diligence – allongement du voyage – qualit\u00e9 pour agir \u2013 prescription. Affr\u00e8tement au voyage – Connaissements \u00e9mis par l’affr\u00e9teur \u00e0 l’ordre du chargeur r\u00e9el – Action intent\u00e9e par l’affr\u00e9teur – Irrecevabilit\u00e9 en l’absence de subrogation.<\/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-4773","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\/4773","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=4773"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4773\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4774,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4773\/revisions\/4774"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4773"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4773"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4773"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}