GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
09:10 Mar 12, 2002 |
French to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents / general conditions of sale | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Steven Geller Local time: 11:59 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 | action or claim without any indemnity |
| ||
4 | without any indemnity being paid |
| ||
4 -3 | in question, without any liability |
|
Discussion entries: 3 | |
---|---|
action or claim without any indemnity Explanation: It would be better to have the whole sentence to see where the "en cause" fits in properly; cause can be an action, claim or cause. A "mise en cause" would be a third party claim |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
without any indemnity being paid Explanation: This expression appears commonly enough throughout conditions of sale, at least the past part does, viz. : "à l'exclusion de toute indemnité." In the contexts of returned goods, it generally appears where goods can be returned or exchanged (perhaps even a refund made) but that the client shall not be indmenified in any way. To attach an appropriate turn of phrase to your context, you realy need to post the whole sentence - better still the sentence before and after it - in French. Literally, "to the exclusion of any indemnity". -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2002-03-12 10:40:12 (GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Without any indemnity, without any indemnity whatsoever, without any indemnity being due… the possibilities are endless www.lubex.com/conditions.pdf without any indemnity for… www.syrecon.org/investment_reg2b.html without any indemnity www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntl13915.htm without any indemnity whatsoever -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2002-03-12 10:47:09 (GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Indemnity rather than liability. A person cna be liable in many ways. Undertaking to indemnify someone for a loss - or indeed refusing to do so, is undertaking or refusing a specific type of liability. An indemnity is an agreements by one person to cover some specific loss. See http://dictionary.law.com -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2002-03-12 10:47:49 (GMT) -------------------------------------------------- I suspect we are looking at this from the point of view of the client agreeing to the conditions of sale. He no doubt has to accept that returns can be made in certain circumstances but that he shall not be indemnified for loss (of enjoyment of product..) -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2002-03-12 14:47:59 (GMT) Post-grading -------------------------------------------------- \"... a free replacement or refund of the goods concerned, to the exclusion of any indemnity whatsoever.\" So the seller is undertaking either to replace the faulty goods or to refund their value. They are expressly excluding any further indemnity, ie no further financial compensation will be paid. They are not seeking to exclude liability, not here anyway. This may well be set out in a disclaimer elsewhere in the contract, and there is a strong chance that the word used there is \"reponsabilité\". -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2002-03-12 14:48:04 (GMT) Post-grading -------------------------------------------------- \"... a free replacement or refund of the goods concerned, to the exclusion of any indemnity whatsoever.\" So the seller is undertaking either to replace the faulty goods or to refund their value. They are expressly excluding any further indemnity, ie no further financial compensation will be paid. They are not seeking to exclude liability, not here anyway. This may well be set out in a disclaimer elsewhere in the contract, and there is a strong chance that the word used there is \"responsabilité\". -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2002-03-12 15:02:04 (GMT) Post-grading -------------------------------------------------- Liability and indemnity are two different things. The defective TV example is useful. The manufacturer will generally be held liable for any defect. The retailer will not. However, the retailer will generally be the one to refund or replace the defective item for the purchaser. The retailer will not indemnify the purchaser for any loss of use for example, nor will the manufacturer for that matter. It is highly likely though that the retailer turn to the manufacturer (or any other party from whom he, the retailer bought the TV) in order to be indemnified for the loss he has sustained in having to refund or exchange the goods for the client. |
| |||||||||||||
1 hr confidence: peer agreement (net): -3
|