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.
Dutch to English translations [PRO] Bus/Financial - Law: Contract(s)
Dutch term or phrase:houden voor
Indien de verkoper zaken van derden betrekt specifiek ter uitvoering van enige verplichting voortvloeiende uit de tussen partijen bestaande rechtsverhouding, zal de verkoper deze houden voor koper als eigenaar.
If the Seller purchases goods from third parties specifically for the purposes of fulfilling any obligation arising from the legal relationship existing between the parties, the Sellers shall ???
I have two ideas for this last bit:
...the Seller shall keep these goods for the Purchaser as the owner.
...the Seller shall consider these goods to be the property of the owner.
I am confused because I have found "iemand houden voor" = "to consider someone to be" and "houden" means to keep, retain, so I am unsure about this last bit.
Could anyone help me please? Thanks in advance for any help.
Explanation: Get the feeling I'm putting my head under the guillotine here (hehe)
OK, here goes.....it's a question of possessory agency.
The heading to this clause is reservation of ownership/retention of title.
This is your first clause, right? (from a previous question)
Eigendomsvoorbehoud
Nadat verkoper het eigendomsvoorbehoud heeft ingeroepen, mag verkoper de geleverde zaken terughalen. Koper staat verkoper toe de plaats te betreden waar deze zaken zich bevinden.
It would be the seller who would be wanting to invoke this clause in the event of non payment by the Purchaser.
Now we need to look at what DOESN'T fall under this reservation when the seller wants to invoke the clause. These are the exclusions to that - the assets over which the seller cannot exercise a reservation of ownership.
In these stated circumstances the seller merely holds the goods on behalf of the purchaser (as an agent and as a lawful possessor - there being a distinction in law between an owner and a possessor)
In the first instance anything which the seller has ordered from a third party (i.e. which he, the seller, isn't owed for himself as he hasn't supplied and which he probably orders in the name of the purchaser anyhow) falls outside the ambit of the reservation.
Hope this helps - see the seller as an agent holding on behalf of the purchaser in these instances.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 3 mins (2005-02-07 18:59:02 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
OK, now you are dealing with the reservation of ownership clause in the contract of the purchaser.
So we aren\'t dealing with any exclusions here, we are dealing with the assertions
In your first example - if the seller (vendor) orders goods from third parties (for the purchaser),the seller on receipt and in order to carry out further obligations holds the goods on behalf of the purchaser.
This is to protect the purchaser most probably from a situation where the seller goes bankrupt so that those goods can\'t be attached.
In your second example specific items are being manufactured for this contract, for the order that the purchaser places - again if the seller were to go bankrupt or be placed into liquidation, the purchaser would need to be able to invoke its resrvation of ownership to prove these were its/his items. Again the seller in the process of manufacturing the item, holds the goods only as an agent.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 4 mins (2005-02-07 18:59:43 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
reservation
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 5 mins (2005-02-07 19:01:12 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
overall yes the goods are considered to be those of the purchaser but this is not dependant on how the seller deems them - that is why the seller holds on behalf of
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 10 mins (2005-02-07 19:06:03 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
the seller is in possession here but the purchaser is the owner......so the law must describe in what relationship the seller holds these and this is as an agent on behalf of the owner, i.e. the purchaser
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 11 mins (2005-02-07 19:06:47 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
OK, that's important additional info but doesn't change the actual answer (the explanation yes but that was purely by way of illustration) - I'll give more info below
Debbie, I am translating two documents. One is Inkoopvoorwaarden for Company X and the other is Verkoopvoorwaarden for the same company X. In the Inkoopvoorwaarden, Company X is the Koper and in the Verkoopvoorwaarden, Company X is the Verkoper. Regarding your answer, NO, the first clause is not the one from my previous question that you added in as part of your answer.
The three clauses in this query (one in my question, two in my "context" note) are from the Eigendomsvoorbehoud article of the Inkoopvoorwaarden. Thus, company X here is the koper.
The clause from my previous question ("Nadat verkoper..") is from the Eigendomsvoorbehoud article in the Verkoopvoorwaarden. Thus, company X here is the verkoper.
This is important to point out to you because company X is the koper in one voorwaarden and the verkoper in the other.
Does this change your answer to this query or not?
I think it means that in these various actions, in everything Vendor does, Purchaser is considered as owner (thereof). wait for Debbie to be sure or to correct..
The title of this article is "Eigendomsvoorbehoud" and my query is the first section under this article. The next two sections are:
Indien de verkoper zaken vormt specifiek ter uitvoering van enige verplichting voortvloeiende uit de tussen partijen bestaande rechtsverhouding, zijn dit zaken, die koper voor zichzelf doet vormen en houdt de verkoper deze voor koper als eigenaar.
Indien koper zaken aan de verkoper in handen geeft ter uitvoering van de tussen partijen bestaande rechtsverhouding, blijven die zaken eigendom van koper.
So you can see that the "houden voor" bit occurs again, in one of these two bits.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
2 hrs confidence:
Seller shall consider these goods to be the property of purchaser.
Explanation: Based on the context, I'll go for your second opinion.
Sevan Local time: 05:17 Specializes in field Native speaker of: Farsi (Persian), Armenian PRO pts in category: 10
Explanation: Get the feeling I'm putting my head under the guillotine here (hehe)
OK, here goes.....it's a question of possessory agency.
The heading to this clause is reservation of ownership/retention of title.
This is your first clause, right? (from a previous question)
Eigendomsvoorbehoud
Nadat verkoper het eigendomsvoorbehoud heeft ingeroepen, mag verkoper de geleverde zaken terughalen. Koper staat verkoper toe de plaats te betreden waar deze zaken zich bevinden.
It would be the seller who would be wanting to invoke this clause in the event of non payment by the Purchaser.
Now we need to look at what DOESN'T fall under this reservation when the seller wants to invoke the clause. These are the exclusions to that - the assets over which the seller cannot exercise a reservation of ownership.
In these stated circumstances the seller merely holds the goods on behalf of the purchaser (as an agent and as a lawful possessor - there being a distinction in law between an owner and a possessor)
In the first instance anything which the seller has ordered from a third party (i.e. which he, the seller, isn't owed for himself as he hasn't supplied and which he probably orders in the name of the purchaser anyhow) falls outside the ambit of the reservation.
Hope this helps - see the seller as an agent holding on behalf of the purchaser in these instances.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 3 mins (2005-02-07 18:59:02 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
OK, now you are dealing with the reservation of ownership clause in the contract of the purchaser.
So we aren\'t dealing with any exclusions here, we are dealing with the assertions
In your first example - if the seller (vendor) orders goods from third parties (for the purchaser),the seller on receipt and in order to carry out further obligations holds the goods on behalf of the purchaser.
This is to protect the purchaser most probably from a situation where the seller goes bankrupt so that those goods can\'t be attached.
In your second example specific items are being manufactured for this contract, for the order that the purchaser places - again if the seller were to go bankrupt or be placed into liquidation, the purchaser would need to be able to invoke its resrvation of ownership to prove these were its/his items. Again the seller in the process of manufacturing the item, holds the goods only as an agent.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 4 mins (2005-02-07 18:59:43 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
reservation
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 5 mins (2005-02-07 19:01:12 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
overall yes the goods are considered to be those of the purchaser but this is not dependant on how the seller deems them - that is why the seller holds on behalf of
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 10 mins (2005-02-07 19:06:03 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
the seller is in possession here but the purchaser is the owner......so the law must describe in what relationship the seller holds these and this is as an agent on behalf of the owner, i.e. the purchaser
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs 11 mins (2005-02-07 19:06:47 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
in what capacity rather.....
Lawyer-Linguist Portugal Local time: 04:17 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 68
Grading comment
Thank you for such an informative and valuable answer!
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +5
