Warranty against latent defects

ass. c iv I, December 12, 2000, Bull No. 324, No. 98-21-789

 

____________________________

 

Failure to give the company Trouillet body builder, MM. Belat and Picard, respectively representing creditors and administrator of this company, and the company GAN fire accident;

 

Whereas in April 1992, a semi-trailer transport refrigeration company Exbrayat broke up, the following month, the company and its insurer, the company Helvetia, have assigned emergency expertise in the company Trouillet, manufacturer of semi trailer, the company and its insurer GAN, in January 1993, the expertise has been extended at the request of the company Trouillet, society Debever and Company, manufacturer of some elements, the company and its Exbrayat insurer has assigned to the bottom in June 1994 and all stakeholders, after the bankruptcy of the company Trouillet, said act directly against the company GAN Debever and society, they sought an order in solidum ;

 

The unique way, made its second branch

 

Having regard to Article 1648 of the Civil Code;

 

Whereas the purchaser acting as a guarantee against hidden defects, who summons a seller in a short period provided by the aforesaid order an expert to see, meet the requirements of this text and that’s when the general limitation that runs from the conclusion of the sale;

 

Whereas, to declare inadmissible as late demand for the company and its insurer Exbrayat against the company and its insurer Trouillet, the judgment notes that the applicants have waited more than two years after the occurrence of the disaster to initiate action Referring to the bottom and that even the starting point of the short notice the day of filing of the report of the expert, July 9, 1993, they have been issued in June 1994 their assignment to the bottom;

 

By so holding, the Court of Appeal violated the text referred to above;

 

And the third part of the plea

 

Having regard to Article 1648 of the Civil Code and Article 125 of the new Code of Civil Procedure;

 

Whereas the end of inadmissibility resulting from the expiration of the short notice provided by the first of these is not of public order, it follows, under the second, it can be raised by the judge;

 

Whereas, to declare inadmissible also direct action exerted by the company and its insurer Exbrayat against society Debever, the Court of Appeal accepted automatically that the company and its insurer had acted tardily;

 

Expected that by thus determining the Court of Appeal violated the above documents; FOR THESE REASONS, and without any need to rule on the first limb

 

Quashed, in all its provisions, the decision of September 11, 1998, between the parties, the Court of Appeal of Lyon; shall, therefore, the cause and the parties in the state they were before said stop, and to be granted, the returns to the Court of Appeal of Lyon, differently composed.

 

 

Advertisements

Posted on ខែមករា 11, 2012, in យុត្តិសាស្រ្ត. Bookmark the permalink. បាន​បិទ​ការ​បញ្ចេញ​មតិ នៅ case 46.

ការ​បញ្ចេញ​មតិ​ត្រូវ​បាន​បិទ។

%d bloggers like this: