06:55 Jan 27 

- L’acte notarié constatant le dépôt… = document A
- Le dépôt de l’acte argué faux… = document B
- A été passé…= in reference to document A (as it is the subject of the sentence)
- En presence non de YYY (my Mr Bloggs) = not in the presence of Mr Bloggs
- Pourtant valide… = Mr Bloggs was apt/capable/competente/of sousnd mind, whatever
- Mais en celle de Me XXX qui le représentait… = but in the presence of Me XXX who was representing him

Document A certifies that document B has been lodged somewhere and it is document A which was signed in the presence of Me XXX rather than that of Mr Bloggs whom he was representing. (I would not stand up in court and swear that Mr Bloggs is the testator. Nothing in the French original posted here enables me to affirm that, although it may be the case. The asker probably knows).

21:59 Jan 26 

..."L'acte notarié constatant le depot de l'acte..."
Doesn't this suggest that the "acte notarié" and the "acte" are separate docs?
So Bloggs makes a will, then a notary draws up a deed of deposition of the will whilst Bloggs is still alive, but instead of doing so in the presence of Bloggs, does so in the presence of Bloggs's lawyer and therefore commits a forgery (presumably by attesting that either Bloggs id dead or incapable). Is that your interpretation, m' learned friend?

21:44 Jan 26 

Don't agree Allegro as the question here is about an allegedly dodgy deed, allegedly having been signed by the lawyer representing Mr Bloggs rather than by Mr Bloggs himself, the latter apparently being perfectly competent/able/apt/fit... to do so at the time. Well dodgy goings-on!

The validity of the document is allegedly dodgy but the qustion being asked here relates very clearly to part of the sentence referring to Mr Bloggs' capacity/fitness (yes, it can work...) to sign.

21:17 Jan 26 

is perhaps to simply say "valid" implying that the notarial deed was valid (on the face of it). I don't see anything in the text to suggest that anybody's capacity (whether legal or mental) was under suspicion. Isn't the issue the possibility of forgery?

20:30 Jan 26 

The original makes no suggestion as to the nature of the individual's validity. I do not think it is wise to infer anything that is not there, even if the intention is in fact relating to a particular facet of validity. We do not know. However, there are a couple of options which are quite satisfactory.

20:17 Jan 26 

I don't give up the discussion :-). And, once again, I just want to argue in a friendly way as a colleague. It's OK if I am wrong. Does it make sense if I say that I find "of sound mind" too restrictive for "fit (and well)".?

15:14 Jan 26 

Revocability : The essence of every Will is that it is revocable during the lifetime of the testator. People capable of making Wills are, Every person who is :

not a minor
of sound mind
free from fraud, coercion or undue influence

13:13 Jan 26 

I am thinking maybe this would be referring to the state of health of Mr YY, so maybe something like "fit and well" / in good health would be on the right lines