Supreme Court of Appeal
Civil Division 1

Public hearing on December 1, 1969 REJECTION.

Published in the Bulletin

FRENCH REPUBLIC


ON BEHALF OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE


On the sole ground: It follows from the wording of the judgment contested Sandrock, is located near the scene of a collision BETWEEN CAR AND Veidt Moped OF MARTIN, AT WHICH THIS UNIT caught fire, ATTEMPT to extinguish the flames with a fire extinguisher, but was wounded by the explosion of the tank;
WHEREAS IT IS ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE COURT OF APPEAL TO HAVE ORDERED THE MARTIN TO REPAIR DAMAGE Sandrock THE GROUND THAT An assistance agreement was formed BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS HE CAN NOT BE WITHOUT THE CONVENTION of the minds and the order has not increased the consent of the salvor,
BUT AS THE COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT MEET the express consent of assistance, WHEN, WHERE THE OFFER IS MADE IN INTEREST IS TO ITS EXCLUSIVE presumed to have accepted,
THOUGH CONSIDERED AS A SOVEREIGN CONVENTION ASSISTANCE WAS FORMED BETWEEN Sandrock AND MARTIN IS RIGHT IN THE appeal judges held that the assistant had OBLIGATION TO REPAIR THE DAMAGE THAT WAS READY VOLUNTEER ASSISTANCE,
thus, THE SUBMISSION CAN NOT BE ACCEPTED,
FOR THESE REASONS: DISMISSES the appeal against the Judgement of 19 MARS 1968 by the Court of Appeal of Colmar.
No. 68-12140. MARTIN C / Sandrock AND OTHERS. PRESIDENT: Mr. Ancel. – Rapporteur: Mr AUSSET. – Advocate General: M. Gégout. – LAWYERS: MM. CAIL AND Tetreau.

 

Advertisements

Posted on ខែមករា 10, 2012, in យុត្តិសាស្រ្ត. Bookmark the permalink. បាន​បិទ​ការ​បញ្ចេញ​មតិ នៅ case 36.

ការ​បញ្ចេញ​មតិ​ត្រូវ​បាន​បិទ។

%d bloggers like this: