{"id":5040,"date":"1982-12-27T08:58:06","date_gmt":"1982-12-27T07:58:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=5040"},"modified":"2016-08-26T09:23:28","modified_gmt":"2016-08-26T08:23:28","slug":"sentence-470","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/1982\/12\/27\/sentence-470\/","title":{"rendered":"Sentence 470"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sentence 470 – Construction navale – connexit\u00e9 – avarie de bigue – expertise judiciaire – th\u00e8se des parties article 1471 NCPC – vice cach\u00e9 – non conformit\u00e9 du navire avec c\/p – pr\u00e9judice affr\u00e9teur – demande en garantie \u2013 d\u00e9faut d’installation constituant un vice cach\u00e9 – manquement pour assistance insuffisante de l’\u00e9quipage – appr\u00e9ciation des arbitres de la part de dommages. <\/strong>Construction navale – Appel en garantie du fr\u00e9teur coque-nue contre le chantier naval pour une avarie de bigue dont le fr\u00e9teur \u00e9tait tenu en grande partie responsable envers son affr\u00e9teur (voir supra sentence n\u00b0 469) – Demande additionnelle du fr\u00e9teur pour un pr\u00e9judice qui lui \u00e9tait personnel – Recours en garantie enti\u00e8rement accord\u00e9 mais demande additionnelle rejet\u00e9e.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sentence 470 – Construction navale – connexit\u00e9 – avarie de bigue – expertise judiciaire – th\u00e8se des parties article 1471 NCPC – vice cach\u00e9 – non conformit\u00e9 du navire avec c\/p – pr\u00e9judice affr\u00e9teur – demande en garantie \u2013 d\u00e9faut d’installation constituant un vice cach\u00e9 – manquement pour assistance insuffisante de l’\u00e9quipage – appr\u00e9ciation des<\/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-5040","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\/5040","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=5040"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5040\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5041,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5040\/revisions\/5041"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5040"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5040"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5040"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}