Jan 14, 2020 18:17
4 yrs ago
29 viewers *
French term

Ayant pour Avocat le Cabinet XXX

Non-PRO French to English Law/Patents Law (general) Judgment
Représentée par Monsieur XXX
En personne,
Ayant pour Avocat le Cabinet XXX
Change log

Jan 14, 2020 21:36: mchd changed "Level" from "PRO" to "Non-PRO"

Votes to reclassify question as PRO/non-PRO:

Non-PRO (3): Angus Stewart, Jessica Noyes, mchd

When entering new questions, KudoZ askers are given an opportunity* to classify the difficulty of their questions as 'easy' or 'pro'. If you feel a question marked 'easy' should actually be marked 'pro', and if you have earned more than 20 KudoZ points, you can click the "Vote PRO" button to recommend that change.

How to tell the difference between "easy" and "pro" questions:

An easy question is one that any bilingual person would be able to answer correctly. (Or in the case of monolingual questions, an easy question is one that any native speaker of the language would be able to answer correctly.)

A pro question is anything else... in other words, any question that requires knowledge or skills that are specialized (even slightly).

Another way to think of the difficulty levels is this: an easy question is one that deals with everyday conversation. A pro question is anything else.

When deciding between easy and pro, err on the side of pro. Most questions will be pro.

* Note: non-member askers are not given the option of entering 'pro' questions; the only way for their questions to be classified as 'pro' is for a ProZ.com member or members to re-classify it.

Discussion

Eliza Hall Jan 16, 2020:
Thanks for the explanation, Yves.
Yves Barry Ben (asker) Jan 15, 2020:
My bad, I meant to write : Mr. XXX represents the corporation, instead of "the person".
Also, by "legal capacity", I meant as a lawyer or solicitor.
So, to conclude, Mr. XXX is the company's statutory representative, or its "représentant légal". It is likely that he is the chairman of the company, as is often the case in France. As far as his legal defence is concerned, it is provided by "Cabinet XXX".
Sorry for the mistake in my previous answer.
Eliza Hall Jan 15, 2020:
?! Yves, this statement does not make sense, either linguistically or in context: "In my opinion it could be that Monsieur XX is just representing the person, as a "représentant légal" in no legal capacity."

1. Linguistically: you're translating a legal document and mentioning the term "représentant légal." So what on earth do you mean by "in no legal capacity"?!

2. Context: see above; also, what "person" is Mr. XXX representing, when it says right in your source document that the party being represented by Mr. XXX is a corporation?
Yves Barry Ben (asker) Jan 15, 2020:

No further context except that presented by the source text has been given.
In my opinion it could be that Monsieur XX is just representing the person, as a "représentant légal" in no legal capacity.
More source context :
TRIBUNAL DE COMMERCE DE MARSEILLE
Jugement du X Juillet 2018
SA XX Corporation
Représentée par Monsieur XXX
En personne,
Ayant pour Avocat le Cabinet XXX, Avocat au barreau de Paris pris en la personne de Me XXX Avocat au barreau de Paris,
Co-Administrateurs Judiciaires
SCP XXX,
Co- Mandataires judiciaires
SCP XXX
Et
Cocontractants
Société XXX Département clientèle
non comparant
COMPOSITION DU TRIBUNAL"
B D Finch Jan 14, 2020:
@Eliza That's certainly a possibility, but the Asker should confirm or correct it.
Eliza Hall Jan 14, 2020:
@ BD Finch It could be talking about a company that is represented by Mr XXX (e.g. he is the company's CEO) and has Cabinet XXX as its counsel.
B D Finch Jan 14, 2020:
Context needed Why is Monsieur XXX representing themself if he has instructed a firm of lawyers? There seems to be a contradiction here.

Proposed translations

+7
27 mins
Selected

Having as its Counsel the XXX Firm

This is a formal register of language in FR, so I would propose "Having as its Counsel" -- an equally formal register in EN -- as the translation.

Since the "Avocat" is a law firm rather than an individual lawyer, in EN you can't translate "avocat" here as "lawyer." Instead you would use "counsel," which can refer to either an individual lawyer or a law firm.
Peer comment(s):

agree STEPHANE BISSENE ATANGANA
5 mins
Merci.
agree writeaway : This is extremely basic legalese so for once I agree with 100% confidence
45 mins
Thanks :)
agree Yolanda Broad
4 hrs
Thanks.
agree erwan-l
14 hrs
Thanks.
agree B D Finch
20 hrs
Thanks.
agree AllegroTrans : assuming the party is an "it", yes, but I would prefer "the XXX practice", it sounds more apt/professional
1 day 6 hrs
Thanks.
agree ph-b (X)
1 day 21 hrs
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
2 mins

whose law firm is XXX

this is pretty straight forward, IMHO
Peer comment(s):

neutral Eliza Hall : I agree, it is straightforward. Only putting a "neutral" because your perfectly correct meaning doesn't have the formal tone/register of the original.
1 day 19 hrs
Something went wrong...
5 mins

represented/defended by ....

another option: for civil or criminal issues
Something went wrong...
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search