Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
If you enter "kennelijke verschrijving" in google, you will get a long list of entries that almost all have to do with legal issues around 'errors in writing', including court decisions, lawyer's web pages, and reference articles. Added to the client's comment, makes this, i.m.h.o. a proper legal terminology question ;-)
Not just those two words, also the fact that the asker mentions that the client told him it is a common legal term. In legal context it is about the legal implications. That's why the term came in use to begin with.
Please look around for 'vormfout' versus 'kennelijke verschrijving'. You are right that typos occur in any context, but this is about the legal implications of such errors.
That was rather easy to find on the internet. I can't find much about the legal implications of an 'error in writing' but that phrasing seems to fit. Please reclassify as 'legal' - but it is still undesirable to post questions without any context. (I am pleased to see that by changing the category from 'legal' to 'general/conversation/greetings/letters' I am all of a sudden classified as an 'expert' in the field!)
In your context, could it be wilful misrepresentation? Deliberately not describing something correctly?
I do not have time to check this out right now. Having done a quick check, I don't think it can be used in this way.
Reference information: 3. It shall not be possible to bind user to his offers and tenders if the consumer should have understood in accordance with the requirements of reasonableness and fairness and according to the usual criteria in social and economic life that the offer or tender, or part thereof, obviously contains a mistake or an error in writing. http://www.bahrain-grand-prix.com/en/informations/Legal-Info...
Gelet op het uitdrukkelijk vermelde “concurrentiebeding” kan er geen twijfel bestaan aan wat deze partijen beoogden overeen te komen: een verbod voor de werknemer om voor klanten en relaties van de werkgever te werken. Het ontbreken van het woordje niet is wat een “kennelijke verschrijving” wordt genoemd, hetgeen betekent dat iedere leek begrijpt dat er een vergissing in het spel is. http://www.wieringa-advocaten.nl/nlblawg.php?id=921
Lianne Van De Ven United States Native speaker of: Dutch PRO pts in category: 36
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +2
