{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","provider_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","author_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","author_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","title":"Turun HO 1.2.2022 68 - V\u00e4limiesmenettely","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"xKzMbI54gI\"><a href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/turun-ho-1-2-2022-68-valimiesmenettely\/\">Turun HO 1.2.2022 68 &#8211; V\u00e4limiesmenettely<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/turun-ho-1-2-2022-68-valimiesmenettely\/embed\/#?secret=xKzMbI54gI\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u300a Turun HO 1.2.2022 68 &#8211; V\u00e4limiesmenettely \u300b\u2014Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" data-secret=\"xKzMbI54gI\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"RATKAISUN KESKEINEN SIS\u00c4LT\u00d6 Osakassopimuksessa v\u00e4limiehen nimitt\u00e4j\u00e4ksi, mik\u00e4li osapuolet eiv\u00e4t p\u00e4\u00e4se v\u00e4limiehest\u00e4 yksimielisyyteen, oli sovittu kauppakamarin v\u00e4lityslautakunta. Kyseisell\u00e4 kauppakamarilla ei kuitenkaan ollut v\u00e4lityslautakuntaa. Kysymys siit\u00e4, oliko sopimuksessa sellainen virhe, jonka vuoksi v\u00e4limiesmenettelylle ei ollut laillisia edellytyksi\u00e4 eik\u00e4 k\u00e4r\u00e4j\u00e4oikeus siten voinut m\u00e4\u00e4r\u00e4t\u00e4 v\u00e4limiest\u00e4, kun sopijapuolet eiv\u00e4t olleet pystyneet sopimaan v\u00e4limiehest\u00e4. V\u00e4limiesmenettelyst\u00e4 annetun lain 17 \u00a7:n 3 momentin..."}