Aug 21, 2004 12:27
19 yrs ago
English term
The High Court of England ....(punctuation problem in long phrase)
English
Law/Patents
Law (general)
Particulars of a Claim
I need to translate the paragraph below (from a Particulars of a Claim) into Spanish but there's no way I'm starting without fully understanding the English version first (which appears to be very vague as it is).
So, would some kind soul help me with this game of "put the commas in the correct places"?
The full paragraph is this:
"The High Court of England and Wales has power under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982 the Claim having as its object rights in rem in immovable property to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies to hear the Claim and that no proceedings are pending between the parties in Scotland, Northern Ireland or another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act".
I have an idea but would like some fresh opinions to confirm or not.
Thanks a lot in advance.
Grace.
So, would some kind soul help me with this game of "put the commas in the correct places"?
The full paragraph is this:
"The High Court of England and Wales has power under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982 the Claim having as its object rights in rem in immovable property to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies to hear the Claim and that no proceedings are pending between the parties in Scotland, Northern Ireland or another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act".
I have an idea but would like some fresh opinions to confirm or not.
Thanks a lot in advance.
Grace.
Responses
+2
9 mins
Alison Schwitzgebel
France
France
Native in English
&
English
Specializes in field
France
Words that work
Native in: English 
, German
Works in: German to English, Germanic(Other) to English, French to English
Related KudoZ points
:
4
Selected
here goes...
There is a Claim which has as its object rights in rem in immovable property to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982 applies. The High Court of England and Wales has power under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982 to hear the Claim. There are no proceedings pending between the parties in Scotland, Northern Ireland or another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act.
At least that's my first take.
At least that's my first take.
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "This is exactly how I broke it down to grasp the meaning. It's good to have confirmation :o)
Thanks a lot to everyone!!"
+1
7 mins
Michel A.
Works in field
cf infra.
"The High Court of England and Wales has power, under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982, the Claim having as its object rights in rem in immovable property to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies, to hear the Claim and that no proceedings are pending between the parties in Scotland, Northern Ireland or another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act".
IMO
HTH
IMO
HTH
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
cmwilliams (X)
: it may be clearer to say "The High Court.... has power to hear the Claim under the Civil Jurisdiction and judgements Act 1982, the Claim having......
1 hr
|
|
Cheers, yes you're right
|
42 mins
Ramesh Madhavan
Native in English
&
English
Like Helping
Native in: English , Tamil
Works in: English, Tamil to English, Hindi to English, and 4 more.
Here is the big problem broken down to smaller problems
The High Court of England and Wales has power.
This power has been granted under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982.
“the Claim having as its object” = The object of this claim is….
“rights in rem in immovable property” = ‘rem’ is regarding rights or title to - immovable property
“to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies” = [self explanatory]
“to hear the Claim and” = [self explanatory]
“that no proceedings are pending between the parties” = that no other legal case is pending for decision between the parties
“in the courts of Scotland, Northern Ireland or” = [self explanatory]
“another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act"” = any other territory of another state. This state has it’s own laws, but the laws in the ‘territory’ is the same laws as ours. [Example: Hong Kong. It is now part of China but property laws follow UK laws]
Such territories are defined in Section 1(3) of the Act.
Hope this helps :-))
This power has been granted under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982.
“the Claim having as its object” = The object of this claim is….
“rights in rem in immovable property” = ‘rem’ is regarding rights or title to - immovable property
“to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies” = [self explanatory]
“to hear the Claim and” = [self explanatory]
“that no proceedings are pending between the parties” = that no other legal case is pending for decision between the parties
“in the courts of Scotland, Northern Ireland or” = [self explanatory]
“another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act"” = any other territory of another state. This state has it’s own laws, but the laws in the ‘territory’ is the same laws as ours. [Example: Hong Kong. It is now part of China but property laws follow UK laws]
Such territories are defined in Section 1(3) of the Act.
Hope this helps :-))
32 mins
~
"The High Court of England and Wales has power,
under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982,
[if and when the claim has]
- the Claim having as its object rights in rem in immovable property to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies, to hear the Claim
[and in combination with the above when]
- and that no proceedings are pending between the parties in Scotland, Northern Ireland or another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act".
I agree with Michael's punctuation, but if I'm right in thinking that the "the claim having", and "and that" are an archaic legal way of expressing two conditions that have to be fulfilled for the HC to have this power, I would like to use "-"s as well, as above, to highlight the conditions. I appreciate that this isn't always done in legal documents, but then often they don't even provide the commas, as this document illustrates....
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 33 mins (2004-08-21 13:00:35 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
(the three of you probably know (I\'d forgotten), \"rights in rem\" - rights related to a thing)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 35 mins (2004-08-21 13:03:04 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
The HC can hear the claim if these two conditions are both fulfilled
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 39 mins (2004-08-21 13:06:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
No I\'m wrong - it\'s not \"if\" for the two conditions - it\'s \"because\".
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 42 mins (2004-08-21 13:09:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Well - I\'m not wrong - it depends what has happened before, it could be an archaic legal way of expressing the general conditions, but if it\'s talking about an a particular claim then it certainly is as Alison says.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 44 mins (2004-08-21 13:11:11 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
or rather, not as Alison says, but \"because\"
under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982,
[if and when the claim has]
- the Claim having as its object rights in rem in immovable property to which Article 16 of Schedule 1, 3C or 4 to that Act applies, to hear the Claim
[and in combination with the above when]
- and that no proceedings are pending between the parties in Scotland, Northern Ireland or another convention territory of contrasting state as defined by Section 1(3) of the Act".
I agree with Michael's punctuation, but if I'm right in thinking that the "the claim having", and "and that" are an archaic legal way of expressing two conditions that have to be fulfilled for the HC to have this power, I would like to use "-"s as well, as above, to highlight the conditions. I appreciate that this isn't always done in legal documents, but then often they don't even provide the commas, as this document illustrates....
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 33 mins (2004-08-21 13:00:35 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
(the three of you probably know (I\'d forgotten), \"rights in rem\" - rights related to a thing)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 35 mins (2004-08-21 13:03:04 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
The HC can hear the claim if these two conditions are both fulfilled
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 39 mins (2004-08-21 13:06:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
No I\'m wrong - it\'s not \"if\" for the two conditions - it\'s \"because\".
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 42 mins (2004-08-21 13:09:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Well - I\'m not wrong - it depends what has happened before, it could be an archaic legal way of expressing the general conditions, but if it\'s talking about an a particular claim then it certainly is as Alison says.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 44 mins (2004-08-21 13:11:11 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
or rather, not as Alison says, but \"because\"
Something went wrong...