English translation: persons claiming under the parties
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.
17:50 Dec 16, 2011
French to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Law (general)
French term or phrase:ayants droit
Another question concerning the manufacturing and supply contract I am translating from French to English (Canadian source). The standard clause “Portée de l’Entente” reads as follows: “Le contrat lie les parties ainsi que leurs héritiers, successibles, mandataries […], cessionnaires, successeurs (incluant tous successeurs résultant d’une fusion), ayants droit et ayants cause respectifs”. “Ayants droits” and “ayants cause” can refer to successors, assigns or successors in interest, plus legal representatives in the case of “ayants cause”. I need some clarification here. Is there a distinction to be made between “successeurs”, “ayants droit” and “ayant cause”?
In the present case, the best solution is to use sweeping-up terms at the end of the list. Therefore, “ayants droit et ayants cause” should be lumped together and can then be helpfully (and as accurately as need be) translated as “beneficiaries and other persons claiming under the parties”. Although the two EN terms do not and cannot correspond exactly to the FR terms they cover all the meanings of the latter.
It is pointless to try to find an exact translation for every term because they overlap so much - and of course the boundaries of meaning will differ from one system and language to another.
“assign” and “assignee” are synonyms (see among others the OED: “One to whom a property or right is legally transferred; = assignee 2. Esp. in the phrase heirs and assigns”)
Interesting post Wordwatcher!
My family and preofssional experience of contracts in the music industry illustrates your points. Indeed, my brother says in the UK a contract of 20 pages will be 40 pages long in France and 60 pages long in the US! (Odd inf act to see how the law has evolved, given that the historical bases of the US system lie in the English system. France's Roman law history tends to mean that every eventuality is stated whereas in England the word "reasonable" leaves room fro an alstic interpretation according to circumstances.
The problem arises from contrasting drafting techniques. To quote Lisbeth Campbell, Faculty of Law, Australian National University, “Although the differences are often exaggerated, the civilian tradition of legislative drafting favours openness and generality (sometimes referred to as "fuzzy" law) while the common law tradition favours precision and particularity (which may be called "fussy" law).” Neither term is pejorative: each reflects a different approach. The knock-on effect is that in a fuzzy law jurisdiction, contracts tend to go into great, or even excessive, detail to cover all possibilities. That is why US contracts tend to be so long and detailed. The problem of numerous - and overlapping - terms saying essentially the same thing is thus usually a problem faced by translators working out of English. However, Canada is a special case. Documents drafted in French there are often drafted according to the “fussy” approach, whereby there is considerable overlap and repetition in lists of terms. That is the case here. There is very little difference between “ayants droit” and “ayants cause” and they are usually used as synonyms (as the GDT notes).
ayant-cause could be stakeholder - perhaps not in this context - or "interested party". Black's Law Dictionary may help sort out these terms in English, and try Wikipedia. Hope this helps.
Nikki: Thanks for your input. Unfortunately, there are no other occurrences of “ayants droit” (or “ayants cause”) in this contract. The word “cessionnaire” is normally “assign” in contracts, so “assign” is not a good candidate for “ayants droit” here. “Successors in interest”, which someone has proposed and which is in Termium, looks more promising.
Yes, these terms may differ slightly. It will be a matter of context as even if it might be referring to the same individuals (which again needs more context), then each time defines a role with slight differences... perhaps. In any event, it woudl be good to find different terms. That can only be done with context.
Are there any other occurences of these terms in the document?
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Local time: 20:39 Specializes in field Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 174
16 hrs confidence:
persons claiming under the parties
Explanation:
In the present case, the best solution is to use sweeping-up terms at the end of the list. Therefore, “ayants droit et ayants cause” should be lumped together and can then be helpfully (and as accurately as need be) translated as “beneficiaries and other persons claiming under the parties”. Although the two EN terms do not and cannot correspond exactly to the FR terms they cover all the meanings of the latter.
It is pointless to try to find an exact translation for every term because they overlap so much - and of course the boundaries of meaning will differ from one system and language to another.
“assign” and “assignee” are synonyms (see among others the OED: “One to whom a property or right is legally transferred; = assignee 2. Esp. in the phrase heirs and assigns”)
Example sentence(s):
Neither party hereto, nor any persons claiming under either of them, shall bring any action or other legal proceedings against the other of them in respect of any such dispute until such dispute shall first have been heard and determined by the arbitrator
...the said D… B…, his heirs and assigns forever or from any other person or persons claiming under him or them. In witness, the said D… B… doth for himself and his heirs set his hand and affix his seal the day and year above written.
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +2
