{"id":812953,"date":"2026-05-02T04:00:23","date_gmt":"2026-05-02T02:00:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/"},"modified":"2026-05-02T04:00:23","modified_gmt":"2026-05-02T02:00:23","slug":"cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/","title":{"rendered":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 &#8211; Servitude de passage"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"kji-decision\">\n<div class=\"kji-full-text\">\n<p>Mati\u00e8res : Foncier<\/p>\n<p>Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE FONCIER \u2013 SERVITUDE DE PASSAGE PROPRIETE ENCLAVEE \u2013MOTIFS \u2013 CONTRADICTION DE MOTIFS<\/p>\n<p>En affirmant que les parcelles cadastrales appartenant aux demandeurs au pourvoi ne sont pas enclav\u00e9es, tout en d\u00e9clarant que la cl\u00f4ture de l\u2019appelant devait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum de 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite de son terrain \u00e0 partir de la borne n\u00b04 pour que l\u2019\u00e9largissement dudit chemin existant soit possible, la Cour d\u2019appel s\u2019est contredite dans ses motivations.<\/p>\n<p>Cassation : Ordinaire<\/p>\n<p>Nature : Civile<\/p>\n<p>Solution : Cassation<\/p>\n<p>ARRET N\u00b0 558 du 18 ao\u00fbt 2017<\/p>\n<p>Dossier : 783\/16-CO<\/p>\n<p>LITIGE FONCIER \u2013 SERVITUDE DE PASSAGE &#8211; PROPRIETE ENCLAVEE \u2013MOTIFS \u2013 CONTRADICTION DE MOTIFS<\/p>\n<p>\u00ab En affirmant que les parcelles cadastrales appartenant aux demandeurs au pourvoi ne sont pas enclav\u00e9es, tout en d\u00e9clarant que la cl\u00f4ture de l\u2019appelant devait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum de 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite de son terrain \u00e0 partir de la borne n\u00b04 pour que l\u2019\u00e9largissement dudit chemin existant soit possible, la Cour d\u2019appel s\u2019est contredite dans ses motivations \u00bb.<\/p>\n<p>Fokonolona Ambohitrakely ; repr\u00e9sent\u00e9 par R.J.M<\/p>\n<p>R.P et consorts ; Commune Urbaine d&#039;Antananarivo<\/p>\n<p>REPUBLIQUE DE MADAGASCAR<\/p>\n<p>COUR DE CASSATION<\/p>\n<p>CHAMBRE CIVILE COMMERCIALE ET SOCIALE<\/p>\n<p>La Cour de Cassation, Chambre Civile Commerciale et Sociale, en son audience publique ordinaire du vendredi dix-huit ao\u00fbt deux mille dix-sept, tenue au palais de Justice \u00e0 Anosy, a rendu l&#039;arr\u00eat dont la teneur suit :<\/p>\n<p>Apr\u00e8s en avoir d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9 conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 la loi ;<\/p>\n<p>Statuant sur le pourvoi de R.J.M demeurant au lot II R 140 G Ambohitrakely repr\u00e9sentant le Fokonolona r\u00e9sidant \u00e0 Ambohitrakely contre l&#039;arr\u00eat n\u00b0596 du 1er juin 2016 rendu par la Chambre Civile de la Cour d&#039;Appel d&#039;Antananarivo dans la proc\u00e9dure qui l&#039;oppose aux consorts R.P ;<\/p>\n<p>Vu les m\u00e9moires en demande et en d\u00e9fense ;<\/p>\n<p>Sur le moyen unique de cassation tir\u00e9 de l&#039;article 26 de la Loi organique n\u00b02004.036 du 1er octobre 2004 sur la Cour Supr\u00eame et pris de la violation de l&#039;article 12 du Code de Proc\u00e9dure Civile et de l&#039;article 682 du Code Civile fran\u00e7ais pour violation de la loi, d\u00e9naturation des faits, insuffisance de motif \u00e9quivalent \u00e0 une absence de motif et manque de base l\u00e9gale ;<\/p>\n<p>en ce que pour infirmer le jugement entrepris et d\u00e9bouter R.J.M et consort de leurs demandes la Cour d&#039;Appel a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 qu&#039;il n&#039;y a pas d&#039;enclavement en se basant uniquement sur le rapport d&#039;expertise du g\u00e9om\u00e8tre asserment\u00e9 et en s&#039;abstenant de r\u00e9pondre aux moyens invoqu\u00e9s par l&#039;intim\u00e9 dans leurs \u00e9critures d&#039;appel, alors que dans ce rapport, l&#039;expert lui-m\u00eame a conclu que la &quot; cl\u00f4ture de l&#039;appelant devrait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum \u00e0 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite de son terrain \u00e0 partir de la borne n\u00b04 pour que l&#039;\u00e9largissement dudit chemin existant soit possible ;&quot;<\/p>\n<p>Qu&#039;il reconna\u00eet que le chemin existant pour acc\u00e9der \u00e0 la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 des intim\u00e9s soit \u00e9troit ;<\/p>\n<p>Qu&#039;il appert des \u00e9l\u00e9ments du dossier que la muraille construite par les appelants n&#039;a pas respect\u00e9 le minimum d&#039;implantation exig\u00e9 suite \u00e0 la susdite expertise ;<\/p>\n<p>Que conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 l&#039;article 682 du Code Civil fran\u00e7ais &quot; le propri\u00e9taire d&#039;un fond enclav\u00e9 soit celui qui n&#039;a sur la voie publique aucune issue ou une issue insuffisante, a le droit d&#039;obtenir sur le fond de son voisin, un passage suffisant pour assurer la desserte compl\u00e8te de son propre fonds &quot; ; que c&#039;est \u00e0 tort que la Cour d\u2019Appel n&#039;a pas voulu l&#039;appliquer dans le cas d&#039;esp\u00e8ce ;<\/p>\n<p>Vu les textes de loi vis\u00e9s au moyen ;<\/p>\n<p>Attendu qu&#039;en affirmant que la parcelle cadastrale n\u00b0415 appartenant \u00e0 l&#039;intim\u00e9 R.J.M et les terrains occup\u00e9s le Fokonolona ne sont pas enclav\u00e9s tout en d\u00e9clarant que la cl\u00f4ture de l&#039;appelant devait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum de 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite de son terrain \u00e0 partir de la borne n\u00b04 pour que l&#039;\u00e9largissement dudit chemin existant soit possible, la Cour d&#039;Appel s&#039;est contredit dans ses motivations ;<\/p>\n<p>Qu&#039;il s&#039;ensuit que le moyen est fond\u00e9 et l&#039;arr\u00eat attaqu\u00e9 encourt la cassation ;<\/p>\n<p>CASSE ET ANNULE l&#039;arr\u00eat n\u00b0596 du 1er juin 2016 de la Chambre Civile de la Cour d&#039;Appel d&#039;Antananarivo ;<\/p>\n<p>Renvoie la cause et les parties devant la m\u00eame Juridiction autrement compos\u00e9e ;<\/p>\n<p>Ordonne la restitution de l&#039;amende de cassation ;<\/p>\n<p>Condamne les d\u00e9fendeurs aux d\u00e9pens.<\/p>\n<p>Ainsi jug\u00e9 et prononc\u00e9 par la Cour de Cassation, Chambre civile Commerciale et Sociale les jour, mois et an que dessus.<\/p>\n<p>O\u00f9 \u00e9taient pr\u00e9sents :<\/p>\n<p>Mesdames et Messieurs :<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; RASOARIMALALA Rinah Victorine, Pr\u00e9sident de Chambre, Pr\u00e9sident ;<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; RAFENOMANANIONY Eliana Blandine, Conseiller &#8211; Rapporteur ;<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; RASOANOROLALAO Isabelle, Conseiller, RAZAFIMORIA David, Conseiller, RAMANANKAVANA Claudette Sophia, Conseiller, tous membres ;<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; RAZANAMAHENINA Marie Louise Tiana, Avocat G\u00e9n\u00e9ral ;<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; ANDRIANALISOA Ramanamisata Eloi, Greffier.<\/p>\n<p>La minute du pr\u00e9sent arr\u00eat a \u00e9t\u00e9 sign\u00e9e par le Pr\u00e9sident, le Rapporteur, et le Greffier.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<hr class=\"kji-sep\" \/>\n<p class=\"kji-source-links\"><strong>Sources officielles :<\/strong> <a class=\"kji-source-link\" href=\"https:\/\/jurisprudence.justice.gov.mg\/decision\/details\/DCS6806DD1E16BA2\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">consulter la page source<\/a> &middot; <a class=\"kji-pdf-link\" href=\"https:\/\/jurisprudence.justice.gov.mg\/decision\/print\/DCS6806DD1E16BA2\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">PDF officiel<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"kji-license-note\"><em>Portail officiel du Ministere de la Justice de Madagascar.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Mati\u00e8res : Foncier Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE FONCIER \u2013 SERVITUDE DE PASSAGE PROPRIETE ENCLAVEE \u2013MOTIFS \u2013 CONTRADICTION DE MOTIFS En affirmant que les parcelles cadastrales appartenant aux demandeurs au pourvoi ne sont pas enclav\u00e9es, tout en d\u00e9clarant que la cl\u00f4ture de l\u2019appelant devait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum de 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":[],"kji_country":[48960],"kji_court":[48961],"kji_chamber":[49056],"kji_year":[52833],"kji_subject":[7625],"kji_keyword":[8424,48966,48968,22914,13938],"kji_language":[7733],"class_list":["post-812953","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-madagascar","kji_court-cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar","kji_chamber-chambre-civile-commerciale-et-sociale","kji_year-52833","kji_subject-commercial","kji_keyword-cassation","kji_keyword-madagascar","kji_keyword-matieres","kji_keyword-passage","kji_keyword-servitude","kji_language-francais"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.9 (Yoast SEO v27.9) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 - Servitude de passage - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 - Servitude de passage\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Mati\u00e8res : Foncier Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE FONCIER \u2013 SERVITUDE DE PASSAGE PROPRIETE ENCLAVEE \u2013MOTIFS \u2013 CONTRADICTION DE MOTIFS En affirmant que les parcelles cadastrales appartenant aux demandeurs au pourvoi ne sont pas enclav\u00e9es, tout en d\u00e9clarant que la cl\u00f4ture de l\u2019appelant devait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum de 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\\\/\",\"name\":\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\\\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 - Servitude de passage - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-02T02:00:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\\\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 &#8211; Servitude de passage\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"width\":1000,\"height\":1000,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 - Servitude de passage - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 - Servitude de passage","og_description":"Mati\u00e8res : Foncier Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE FONCIER \u2013 SERVITUDE DE PASSAGE PROPRIETE ENCLAVEE \u2013MOTIFS \u2013 CONTRADICTION DE MOTIFS En affirmant que les parcelles cadastrales appartenant aux demandeurs au pourvoi ne sont pas enclav\u00e9es, tout en d\u00e9clarant que la cl\u00f4ture de l\u2019appelant devait \u00eatre implant\u00e9e au minimum de 0,5 m\u00e8tre le long de la limite...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/","name":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 - Servitude de passage - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-05-02T02:00:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-18-aout-2017-783-16-co-n-558-servitude-de-passage\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 18 ao\u00fbt 2017, 783\/16-CO n\u00b0 558 &#8211; Servitude de passage"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","width":1000,"height":1000,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/812953","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=812953"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=812953"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=812953"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=812953"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=812953"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=812953"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=812953"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=812953"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}