{"id":783127,"date":"2026-04-30T15:26:41","date_gmt":"2026-04-30T13:26:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/"},"modified":"2026-04-30T15:26:41","modified_gmt":"2026-04-30T13:26:41","slug":"cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/","title":{"rendered":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 &#8212; Vente de bien commun"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"kji-decision\">\n<div class=\"kji-full-text\">\n<p>Mati\u00e8res : R\u00e9gimes matrimoniaux<\/p>\n<p>Mots cl\u00e9s : BIENS COMMUNS \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUX DE LA TOTALITE DE LA PROPRIETE COMMUNE \u2013 ABSENCE DE CONSENTEMENT DE L\u2019AUTRE CONJOINT \u2013 VENTE DE LA CHOSE D\u2019AUTRUI \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUSE DE SA PART \u2013 RETRACTATION DECISION D\u2019HOMOLOGATION PAR LA COUR D\u2019APPEL \u2013 EXCES D<\/p>\n<p>En vendant l\u2019int\u00e9gralit\u00e9 de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 sans le consentement de son ex-\u00e9pouse, le d\u00e9fendeur au pourvoi a dispos\u00e9 plus de droit qu\u2019il n\u2019en poss\u00e8de. Il y a vente de la chose d\u2019autrui. En ordonnant la r\u00e9tractation du jugement n\u00b01092 du 12 novembre 2003 portant homologation de l\u2019acte de vente conclu entre les demanderesses au pourvoi, la Cour d\u2019appel a exc\u00e9d\u00e9 son pouvoir, l\u2019acte de vente intervenu entre les d\u00e9fendeurs au pourvoi \u00e9tant en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 nul et de nul effet.<\/p>\n<p>Cassation : Ordinaire<\/p>\n<p>Nature : Sociale<\/p>\n<p>Solution : Rejet<\/p>\n<p>ARR\u00caT N\u00b0 368 du 28 ao\u00fbt 2018<\/p>\n<p>Dossier : 614\/07-CO<\/p>\n<p>BIENS COMMUNS \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-\u00c9POUX DE LA TOTALIT\u00c9 DE LA PROPRI\u00c9T\u00c9 COMMUNE \u2013 ABSENCE DE CONSENTEMENT DE L\u2019AUTRE CONJOINT \u2013 VENTE DE LA CHOSE D\u2019AUTRUI \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-\u00c9POUSE DE SA PART \u2013 R\u00c9TRACTATION D\u00c9CISION D\u2019HOMOLOGATION PAR LA COUR D\u2019APPEL \u2013 EXC\u00c8S DE POUVOIR<\/p>\n<p>&quot;En vendant l\u2019int\u00e9gralit\u00e9 de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 sans le consentement de son ex-\u00e9pouse, le d\u00e9fendeur au pourvoi a dispos\u00e9 plus de droit qu\u2019il n\u2019en poss\u00e8de. Il y a vente de la chose d\u2019autrui.<\/p>\n<p>En ordonnant la r\u00e9tractation du jugement n\u00b01092 du 12 novembre 2003 portant homologation de l\u2019acte de vente conclu entre les demanderesses au pourvoi, la Cour d\u2019appel a exc\u00e9d\u00e9 son pouvoir, l\u2019acte de vente intervenu entre les d\u00e9fendeurs au pourvoi \u00e9tant en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 nul et de nul effet.&quot;<\/p>\n<p>R\u00c9PUBLIQUE DE MADAGASCAR<\/p>\n<p>COUR DE CASSATION<\/p>\n<p>CHAMBRE CIVILE COMMERCIALE ET SOCIALE ET SOCIALE<\/p>\n<p>La Cour de Cassation, Chambre civile Commerciale et Sociale en son audience publique ordinaire du mardi vingt-huit ao\u00fbt deux mille dix-huit, 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.H. et R.H.A., ayant pour conseil Me Raharimalala Norosoa, avocat au lot 23 B 89 Est Gare Antsirabe, contre l&#039;arr\u00eat n\u00b0422 rendu le 26 mars 2007 par la Chambre Civile de la Cour d&#039;Appel d&#039;Antananarivo dans le litige qui les oppose \u00e0 R.A. et R.H.J. ayant pour conseil Ma\u00eetre Bakolalaina Louisette RANDRIANARISON RAKOTOARIVELO, Avocat lot 22 A Tsarasaotra Face Agence STAR Antsirabe ;<\/p>\n<p>Vu les m\u00e9moires en demande et en d\u00e9fense produits au dossier ;<\/p>\n<p>Sur le moyen unique de cassation tir\u00e9 de la violation de l&#039;article 26 de la loi organique 2004.036 du 1er octobre 2004 relative \u00e0 la Cour Supr\u00eame pour exc\u00e8s de pouvoir, absence, insuffisance, contradiction de motifs et g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement impossibilit\u00e9 pour la Cour Supr\u00eame d&#039;exercer son contr\u00f4le ainsi que non r\u00e9ponse aux conclusions en ce que la Cour d&#039;Appel a infirm\u00e9 partiellement le jugement n\u00b029 du 26 janvier 2005 par la r\u00e9tractation du jugement civil n\u00b01092 du 12 novembre 2003 portant homologation de l&#039;acte de vente conclu le 24 mai 2000 entre R.H. et R.H.A. alors que R.A et R.H.J. n&#039;ont nullement formul\u00e9 ni appel principal ni appel incident demandant une infirmation dudit jugement, que la Cour d&#039;Appel par l&#039;arr\u00eat attaqu\u00e9 a ainsi exc\u00e9d\u00e9 ses pouvoirs et a d\u00e9natur\u00e9 les faits pouvant justifier la cassation et l&#039;annulation ;<\/p>\n<p>Vu les textes de loi vis\u00e9s au moyen ;<\/p>\n<p>Attendu qu&#039;il est constant et non contest\u00e9 que la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 litigieuse est commune aux \u00e9poux divorc\u00e9s R.A. et R.H.A. ;<\/p>\n<p>Que R.A., en vendant l&#039;int\u00e9gralit\u00e9 de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 a R.H.J. sans le consentement de RANIVOMALALA Hanitra Aim\u00e9e, a dispos\u00e9 plus de droit qu&#039;il n&#039;en poss\u00e8de ;<\/p>\n<p>Qu&#039;il y a vente de la chose d&#039;autrui en tant que chacun des \u00e9poux ne pouvait ali\u00e9ner que la moiti\u00e9 de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 litigieuse ;<\/p>\n<p>Que la Cour d&#039;Appel en ordonnant la r\u00e9tractation du jugement n\u00b01092 du 12 novembre 2003 portant homologation de l&#039;acte de vente conclu entre les demanderesses au pourvoi le 24 mai 2000, a exc\u00e9d\u00e9 son pouvoir, l&#039;acte de vente intervenu entre R.A. et consorts \u00e9tant en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 nul et de nul effet ;<\/p>\n<p>Qu&#039;il suit de ces \u00e9nonciations que le moyen est fond\u00e9 ;<\/p>\n<p>CASSE ET ANNULE l&#039;arr\u00eat n\u00b0422 rendu le 26 mars 2007 rendu par la Chambre Civile de la Cour d&#039;Appel d&#039;Antananarivo ;<\/p>\n<p>Renvoie la proc\u00e9dure et les parties devant la m\u00eame juridiction mais autrement compos\u00e9e ;<\/p>\n<p>Ordonne la restitution de l&#039;amende de cassation ;<\/p>\n<p>Laisse les d\u00e9pens \u00e0 la charge des d\u00e9fendeurs ;<\/p>\n<p>Ainsi jug\u00e9 et prononc\u00e9 par la Cour de Cassation, Chambre civile Commerciale et Sociale, en son audience publique, les jour, mois et an que dessus.<\/p>\n<p>O\u00f9 \u00e9taient pr\u00e9sents:<\/p>\n<p>Mesdames et Messieurs :<\/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\/DCS68389AFFF0374\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">consulter la page source<\/a> &middot; <a class=\"kji-pdf-link\" href=\"https:\/\/jurisprudence.justice.gov.mg\/decision\/print\/DCS68389AFFF0374\" 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 : R\u00e9gimes matrimoniaux Mots cl\u00e9s : BIENS COMMUNS \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUX DE LA TOTALITE DE LA PROPRIETE COMMUNE \u2013 ABSENCE DE CONSENTEMENT DE L\u2019AUTRE CONJOINT \u2013 VENTE DE LA CHOSE D\u2019AUTRUI \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUSE DE SA PART \u2013 RETRACTATION DECISION D\u2019HOMOLOGATION PAR LA COUR D\u2019APPEL \u2013 EXCES D En vendant l\u2019int\u00e9gralit\u00e9 de&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[48960],"kji_court":[48961],"kji_chamber":[49045],"kji_year":[47917],"kji_subject":[7625],"kji_keyword":[8424,49055,48966,48968,20352],"kji_language":[7733],"class_list":["post-783127","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-et-sociale","kji_year-47917","kji_subject-commercial","kji_keyword-cassation","kji_keyword-commun","kji_keyword-madagascar","kji_keyword-matieres","kji_keyword-vente","kji_language-francais"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.5 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 - Vente de bien commun - 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\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 - Vente de bien commun\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Mati\u00e8res : R\u00e9gimes matrimoniaux Mots cl\u00e9s : BIENS COMMUNS \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUX DE LA TOTALITE DE LA PROPRIETE COMMUNE \u2013 ABSENCE DE CONSENTEMENT DE L\u2019AUTRE CONJOINT \u2013 VENTE DE LA CHOSE D\u2019AUTRUI \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUSE DE SA PART \u2013 RETRACTATION DECISION D\u2019HOMOLOGATION PAR LA COUR D\u2019APPEL \u2013 EXCES D En vendant l\u2019int\u00e9gralit\u00e9 de...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/\" \/>\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=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"4 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u044b\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\\\/\",\"name\":\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\\\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 - Vente de bien commun - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-30T13:26:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\\\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 &#8211; Vente de bien commun\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"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\\\/ru\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 - Vente de bien commun - 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\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 - Vente de bien commun","og_description":"Mati\u00e8res : R\u00e9gimes matrimoniaux Mots cl\u00e9s : BIENS COMMUNS \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUX DE LA TOTALITE DE LA PROPRIETE COMMUNE \u2013 ABSENCE DE CONSENTEMENT DE L\u2019AUTRE CONJOINT \u2013 VENTE DE LA CHOSE D\u2019AUTRUI \u2013 VENTE PAR L\u2019EX-EPOUSE DE SA PART \u2013 RETRACTATION DECISION D\u2019HOMOLOGATION PAR LA COUR D\u2019APPEL \u2013 EXCES D En vendant l\u2019int\u00e9gralit\u00e9 de...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"4 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u044b"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/","name":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 - Vente de bien commun - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-30T13:26:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-28-aout-2018-614-07-co-n-368-vente-de-bien-commun\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 28 ao\u00fbt 2018, 614\/07-CO n\u00b0 368 &#8211; Vente de bien commun"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","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\/ru\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/783127","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=783127"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=783127"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=783127"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=783127"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=783127"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=783127"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=783127"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=783127"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}