{"id":19302,"date":"2020-11-05T17:45:12","date_gmt":"2020-11-05T16:45:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/?p=19302"},"modified":"2025-09-05T12:04:16","modified_gmt":"2025-09-05T10:04:16","slug":"cass-lux-29-octobre-2020","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/2020\/11\/05\/cass-lux-29-octobre-2020\/","title":{"rendered":"Cass. Lux. 29 octobre 2020"},"content":{"rendered":"<article class=\"article search-result search-result--jurisprudence\" role=\"article\">\n<p class=\"number\"><a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/content\/dam\/justice\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-cassation\/social\/2020\/10\/20201029-CAS-2019-00144-139a.pdf\">Cass. Lux. Soc. 29 octobre 2020 n\u00b0139\/20<\/a> (CAS-2019-00144): au visa des articles 89 de la Constitution<span class=\"footnote_referrer\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_1');\" onkeypress=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_1');\" ><sup id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_1\" class=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text\">(1)<\/sup><\/a><span id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_1\" class=\"footnote_tooltip\">\u00ab\u00a0<em>Tout jugement est motiv\u00e9<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0. <\/span><\/span><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> jQuery('#footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_1').tooltip({ tip: '#footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_1', tipClass: 'footnote_tooltip', effect: 'fade', predelay: 0, fadeInSpeed: 200, delay: 400, fadeOutSpeed: 200, position: 'top right', relative: true, offset: [10, 10], });<\/script> et 249 du Nouveau code de proc\u00e9dure civile<span class=\"footnote_referrer\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_2');\" onkeypress=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_2');\" ><sup id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_2\" class=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text\">(2)<\/sup><\/a><span id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_2\" class=\"footnote_tooltip\">\u00ab\u00a0<em>La r\u00e9daction des jugements contiendra&#8230; leurs conclusions [des parties], l&rsquo;exposition sommaire des points de fait et de droit, les motifs et le dispositif des jugements<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0. <\/span><\/span><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> jQuery('#footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_2').tooltip({ tip: '#footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_2', tipClass: 'footnote_tooltip', effect: 'fade', predelay: 0, fadeInSpeed: 200, delay: 400, fadeOutSpeed: 200, position: 'top right', relative: true, offset: [10, 10], });<\/script>, \u00a0la Cour de cassation censure les juges du fond qui n&rsquo;auraient pas r\u00e9pondu \u00e0 la critique par le requ\u00e9rant selon laquelle la r\u00e8gle pos\u00e9e par l&rsquo;article L.551-5 (2) du code du travail, en tant qu&rsquo;elle imposerait une anciennet\u00e9 de service d&rsquo;au moins dix ans aupr\u00e8s du m\u00eame employeur ou une aptitude m\u00e9dicalement constat\u00e9e par le m\u00e9decin du travail au m\u00eame poste de travail pendant dix ans, engendrerait une rupture du principe d&rsquo;\u00e9galit\u00e9 devant la loi entre les salari\u00e9s \u00a0<span class=\"footnote_referrer\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_3');\" onkeypress=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_3');\" ><sup id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_3\" class=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text\">(3)<\/sup><\/a><span id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_3\" class=\"footnote_tooltip\">Curieusement, un arr\u00eat du m\u00eame jour du\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/anon.public.lu\/Juridictions%20de%20la%20s\u00e9curit\u00e9%20sociale%20anonymis\u00e9e\/2019\/20190711_COMIX20190020-accessible.pdf\">Conseil sup\u00e9rieur de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale, 11 juillet 2019<\/a> num\u00e9ro 2019\/0166 (n\u00b0. du reg.: COMIX 2019\/0020), qui semble traiter de la m\u00eame affaire, rejette la question de constitutionnalit\u00e9 pos\u00e9e par le requ\u00e9rant.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> jQuery('#footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_3').tooltip({ tip: '#footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_3', tipClass: 'footnote_tooltip', effect: 'fade', predelay: 0, fadeInSpeed: 200, delay: 400, fadeOutSpeed: 200, position: 'top right', relative: true, offset: [10, 10], });<\/script>. Selon le requ\u00e9rant, la r\u00e8gle pos\u00e9e par l&rsquo;article 551-5(2) du Code du travail est contraire \u00e0 l\u2019objectif du texte, cr\u00e9atrice d\u2019une injustice sociale et engendre une discrimination injustifi\u00e9e entre les salari\u00e9s. Le L\u00e9gislateur peut traiter de fa\u00e7on diff\u00e9rente des salari\u00e9s qui sont dans des situations diff\u00e9rentes. Mais le principe d&rsquo;\u00e9galit\u00e9 veut encore que la diff\u00e9rence de traitement soit objectivement justifi\u00e9e, c&rsquo;est-\u00e0-dire que la diff\u00e9rence de traitement doit \u00eatre rationnellement justifi\u00e9e, ad\u00e9quate et proportionn\u00e9e<span class=\"footnote_referrer\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_4');\" onkeypress=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_4');\" ><sup id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_4\" class=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text\">(4)<\/sup><\/a><span id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_4\" class=\"footnote_tooltip\">Recueil des d\u00e9cisions de la Cour constitutionnelle, 1998-2019, v. aussi les <a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-constitutionnelle.html\">publications des arr\u00eats<\/a> au fil de l&rsquo;eau. <\/span><\/span><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> jQuery('#footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_4').tooltip({ tip: '#footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_4', tipClass: 'footnote_tooltip', effect: 'fade', predelay: 0, fadeInSpeed: 200, delay: 400, fadeOutSpeed: 200, position: 'top right', relative: true, offset: [10, 10], });<\/script>.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/content\/dam\/justice\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-cassation\/penal\/2020\/10\/20201029-CAS-2020-00086-138a.pdf\">Cass. Lux. p\u00e9nal, 29 octobre 2020, n\u00b0138\/20<\/a> (CAS-2020-00086) et\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/content\/dam\/justice\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-cassation\/penal\/2020\/10\/20201029-CAS-2020-00053-137a.pdf\">Cass. Lux. p\u00e9nal, 29 octobre 2020, n\u00b0137\/2020<\/a> (CAS-2020-00053): dans ces deux arr\u00eats, le pourvoi est jug\u00e9 irrecevable pour inobservation des r\u00e8gles de la proc\u00e9dure du pourvoi en cassation en mati\u00e8re p\u00e9nale, et notamment du d\u00e9lai d&rsquo;un mois pour introduire le pourvoi. Le premier arr\u00eat concerne une proc\u00e9dure en mati\u00e8re de protection de la jeunesse, soumise par le l\u00e9gislateur aux r\u00e8gles de la proc\u00e9dure p\u00e9nale, sauf d\u00e9rogation d\u00e9coulant des dispositions de la loi\u00a0modifi\u00e9e du 10 ao\u00fbt 1992 relative \u00e0 la protection de la jeunesse. Le second concerne une proc\u00e9dure de droit commun confront\u00e9e \u00e0 la lisibilit\u00e9 toute relative des dispositions proc\u00e9durales COVID19 relatives au calcul du d\u00e9lai pour d\u00e9poser le m\u00e9moire en cassation, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/2020\/10\/20\/cass-lux-15-octobre-2020\/\">difficult\u00e9 d\u00e9j\u00e0 rencontr\u00e9e<\/a> dans l&rsquo;arr\u00eat <a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/content\/dam\/justice\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-cassation\/penal\/2020\/10\/20201015-CAS-2020-00057-131a.pd\">Cass. Lux. p\u00e9nale du 15\/10\/2020 n\u00b0131\/2020<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/content\/dam\/justice\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-cassation\/civil\/2020\/10\/20201029-CAS-2019-00133-136a.pdf\">Cass. Lux. Civ. 29 octobre 2020, n\u00b0136\/20<\/a>, (CAS-2019-00133): la Cour de cassation approuve les juges du fond d&rsquo;avoir d\u00e9duit de la d\u00e9cision du juge administratif constatant l&rsquo;ill\u00e9galit\u00e9 d&rsquo;une d\u00e9cision de l&rsquo;administration que celle-ci avait commis une faute de nature \u00e0 engager sa responsabilit\u00e9<span class=\"footnote_referrer\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_5');\" onkeypress=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_5');\" ><sup id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_5\" class=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text\">(5)<\/sup><\/a><span id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_5\" class=\"footnote_tooltip\">La lecture des volumineuses conclusions du Parquet g\u00e9n\u00e9ral permet d&rsquo;appr\u00e9hender les enjeux du litige. <\/span><\/span><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> jQuery('#footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_5').tooltip({ tip: '#footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_5', tipClass: 'footnote_tooltip', effect: 'fade', predelay: 0, fadeInSpeed: 200, delay: 400, fadeOutSpeed: 200, position: 'top right', relative: true, offset: [10, 10], });<\/script>.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/content\/dam\/justice\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-cassation\/civil\/2020\/10\/20201029-CAS-2019-00104-135a.pdf\">Cass. Lux. Civ. 29 octobre 2020 n\u00b0135\/2020<\/a> (CAS-2019-00104): le pourvoi reprochait aux juges du fond de n&rsquo;avoir pas tenu compte du principe selon lequel la prescription ne court pas contre celui qui est emp\u00each\u00e9 d&rsquo;agir (\u00ab\u00a0<em>contra non valentem agere non currit praescriptio<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0), ce \u00e0 quoi la Cour r\u00e9pond que :<\/p>\n<div class=\"page\" title=\"Page 7\">\n<div class=\"layoutArea\">\n<div class=\"column\">\n<blockquote><p><em>La violation d\u2019un principe g\u00e9n\u00e9ral du droit ne donne ouverture \u00e0 cassation que s\u2019il trouve son expression dans un texte de loi ou s\u2019il est consacr\u00e9 par une juridiction supranationale.\u00a0<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Or en droit luxembourgeois\u00a0ce principe r\u00e9sulte de la jurisprudence<span class=\"footnote_referrer\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_6');\" onkeypress=\"footnote_moveToReference_19302_1('footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_6');\" ><sup id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_6\" class=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text\">(6)<\/sup><\/a><span id=\"footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_6\" class=\"footnote_tooltip\">T. HOSCHEIT, \u00ab\u00a0Point de d\u00e9part et computation de la prescription\u00a0\u00bb in <i>Annales du droit luxembourgeois \u2013 Volume 29 \u2013 2019<\/i>, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2020, p. 81-141, sp\u00e9c. p. 117 et s. <\/span><\/span><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> jQuery('#footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_6').tooltip({ tip: '#footnote_plugin_tooltip_text_19302_1_6', tipClass: 'footnote_tooltip', effect: 'fade', predelay: 0, fadeInSpeed: 200, delay: 400, fadeOutSpeed: 200, position: 'top right', relative: true, offset: [10, 10], });<\/script>.<\/p>\n<span class='bctt-click-to-tweet'><span class='bctt-ctt-text'><a href='https:\/\/x.com\/intent\/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.evematringe.eu%2Fbl0g%2F2020%2F11%2F05%2Fcass-lux-29-octobre-2020%2F&#038;text=Cass.%20Lux.%2029%20octobre%202020&#038;related' target='_blank'rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Cass. Lux. 29 octobre 2020 <\/a><\/span><a href='https:\/\/x.com\/intent\/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.evematringe.eu%2Fbl0g%2F2020%2F11%2F05%2Fcass-lux-29-octobre-2020%2F&#038;text=Cass.%20Lux.%2029%20octobre%202020&#038;related' target='_blank' class='bctt-ctt-btn'rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Share on X<\/a><\/span>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<div class=\"speaker-mute footnotes_reference_container\"> <div class=\"footnote_container_prepare\"><p><span role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_reference_container_label pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_expand_collapse_reference_container_19302_1();\">References<\/span><span role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_reference_container_collapse_button\" style=\"display: none;\" onclick=\"footnote_expand_collapse_reference_container_19302_1();\">[<a id=\"footnote_reference_container_collapse_button_19302_1\">+<\/a>]<\/span><\/p><\/div> <div id=\"footnote_references_container_19302_1\" style=\"\"><table class=\"footnotes_table footnote-reference-container\"><caption class=\"accessibility\">References<\/caption> <tbody> \r\n\r\n<tr class=\"footnotes_plugin_reference_row\"> <th scope=\"row\" id=\"footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_1\" class=\"footnote_plugin_index pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1('footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_1');\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_plugin_link\" ><span class=\"footnote_index_arrow\">&#8593;<\/span>1<\/a><\/th> <td class=\"footnote_plugin_text\">\u00ab\u00a0<em>Tout jugement est motiv\u00e9<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0. <\/td><\/tr>\r\n\r\n<tr class=\"footnotes_plugin_reference_row\"> <th scope=\"row\" id=\"footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_2\" class=\"footnote_plugin_index pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1('footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_2');\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_plugin_link\" ><span class=\"footnote_index_arrow\">&#8593;<\/span>2<\/a><\/th> <td class=\"footnote_plugin_text\">\u00ab\u00a0<em>La r\u00e9daction des jugements contiendra&#8230; leurs conclusions [des parties], l&rsquo;exposition sommaire des points de fait et de droit, les motifs et le dispositif des jugements<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0. <\/td><\/tr>\r\n\r\n<tr class=\"footnotes_plugin_reference_row\"> <th scope=\"row\" id=\"footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_3\" class=\"footnote_plugin_index pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1('footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_3');\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_plugin_link\" ><span class=\"footnote_index_arrow\">&#8593;<\/span>3<\/a><\/th> <td class=\"footnote_plugin_text\">Curieusement, un arr\u00eat du m\u00eame jour du\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/anon.public.lu\/Juridictions%20de%20la%20s\u00e9curit\u00e9%20sociale%20anonymis\u00e9e\/2019\/20190711_COMIX20190020-accessible.pdf\">Conseil sup\u00e9rieur de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale, 11 juillet 2019<\/a> num\u00e9ro 2019\/0166 (n\u00b0. du reg.: COMIX 2019\/0020), qui semble traiter de la m\u00eame affaire, rejette la question de constitutionnalit\u00e9 pos\u00e9e par le requ\u00e9rant.\u00a0<\/td><\/tr>\r\n\r\n<tr class=\"footnotes_plugin_reference_row\"> <th scope=\"row\" id=\"footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_4\" class=\"footnote_plugin_index pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1('footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_4');\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_plugin_link\" ><span class=\"footnote_index_arrow\">&#8593;<\/span>4<\/a><\/th> <td class=\"footnote_plugin_text\">Recueil des d\u00e9cisions de la Cour constitutionnelle, 1998-2019, v. aussi les <a href=\"https:\/\/justice.public.lu\/fr\/jurisprudence\/cour-constitutionnelle.html\">publications des arr\u00eats<\/a> au fil de l&rsquo;eau. <\/td><\/tr>\r\n\r\n<tr class=\"footnotes_plugin_reference_row\"> <th scope=\"row\" id=\"footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_5\" class=\"footnote_plugin_index pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1('footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_5');\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_plugin_link\" ><span class=\"footnote_index_arrow\">&#8593;<\/span>5<\/a><\/th> <td class=\"footnote_plugin_text\">La lecture des volumineuses conclusions du Parquet g\u00e9n\u00e9ral permet d&rsquo;appr\u00e9hender les enjeux du litige. <\/td><\/tr>\r\n\r\n<tr class=\"footnotes_plugin_reference_row\"> <th scope=\"row\" id=\"footnote_plugin_reference_19302_1_6\" class=\"footnote_plugin_index pointer\" onclick=\"footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1('footnote_plugin_tooltip_19302_1_6');\"><a role=\"button\" tabindex=\"0\" class=\"footnote_plugin_link\" ><span class=\"footnote_index_arrow\">&#8593;<\/span>6<\/a><\/th> <td class=\"footnote_plugin_text\">T. HOSCHEIT, \u00ab\u00a0Point de d\u00e9part et computation de la prescription\u00a0\u00bb in <i>Annales du droit luxembourgeois \u2013 Volume 29 \u2013 2019<\/i>, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2020, p. 81-141, sp\u00e9c. p. 117 et s. <\/td><\/tr>\r\n\r\n <\/tbody> <\/table> <\/div><\/div><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> function footnote_expand_reference_container_19302_1() { jQuery('#footnote_references_container_19302_1').show(); jQuery('#footnote_reference_container_collapse_button_19302_1').text('\u2212'); } function footnote_collapse_reference_container_19302_1() { jQuery('#footnote_references_container_19302_1').hide(); jQuery('#footnote_reference_container_collapse_button_19302_1').text('+'); } function footnote_expand_collapse_reference_container_19302_1() { if (jQuery('#footnote_references_container_19302_1').is(':hidden')) { footnote_expand_reference_container_19302_1(); } else { footnote_collapse_reference_container_19302_1(); } } function footnote_moveToReference_19302_1(p_str_TargetID) { footnote_expand_reference_container_19302_1(); var l_obj_Target = jQuery('#' + p_str_TargetID); if (l_obj_Target.length) { jQuery( 'html, body' ).delay( 0 ); jQuery('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: l_obj_Target.offset().top - window.innerHeight * 0.2 }, 380); } } function footnote_moveToAnchor_19302_1(p_str_TargetID) { footnote_expand_reference_container_19302_1(); var l_obj_Target = jQuery('#' + p_str_TargetID); if (l_obj_Target.length) { jQuery( 'html, body' ).delay( 0 ); jQuery('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: l_obj_Target.offset().top - window.innerHeight * 0.2 }, 380); } }<\/script>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Cass. Lux. Soc. 29 octobre 2020 n\u00b0139\/20 (CAS-2019-00144): au visa des articles 89 de la Constitution(1)\u00ab\u00a0Tout jugement est motiv\u00e9\u00ab\u00a0. et 249 du Nouveau code de proc\u00e9dure civile(2)\u00ab\u00a0La r\u00e9daction des jugements contiendra&#8230; leurs conclusions [des parties], l&rsquo;exposition sommaire des points de fait et de droit, les motifs et le dispositif des jugements\u00ab\u00a0. , \u00a0la Cour de&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/2020\/11\/05\/cass-lux-29-octobre-2020\/\">Poursuivre la lecture <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Cass. Lux. 29 octobre 2020<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[692,691,690,384,695,693,306,11,694],"class_list":["post-19302","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-droit-luxembourgeois","tag-cass-lux-civ-29-octobre-2020","tag-cass-lux-civ-29-octobre-2020-n135-2020-cas-2019-00104","tag-cass-lux-soc-29-octobre-2020-n139-20-cas-2019-00144","tag-contra-valentem","tag-egalite-devant-la-loi","tag-n136-20-cas-2019-00133","tag-office-du-juge","tag-prescription","tag-responsabilite-des-personnes-publiques","entry"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19302","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19302"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19302\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":45746,"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19302\/revisions\/45746"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.evematringe.eu\/bl0g\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}