Mar 11, 2004 06:51
20 yrs ago
1 viewer *
German term
für den Fall das wir zu vertreten haben
German to English
Bus/Financial
Business/Commerce (general)
terms and conditions of sale
FÜR DEN FALL; DASS WIR ZU VERTRETEN HABEN; HAFTEN WIR IN
DER WEISE; DASS DER BESTELLER BERECHTIGT IST; VOM JEWEILIGEN VERTRAG ZURÜCKZUTRETEN.
The Purchaser is entitled to rescind the contract in the event of faults or shortcomings we are liable for.
Is my solution OK or too short???
TIA for your comments!!!!
DER WEISE; DASS DER BESTELLER BERECHTIGT IST; VOM JEWEILIGEN VERTRAG ZURÜCKZUTRETEN.
The Purchaser is entitled to rescind the contract in the event of faults or shortcomings we are liable for.
Is my solution OK or too short???
TIA for your comments!!!!
Proposed translations
(English)
| 3 +1 | OK |
Michael Pauls
|
Change log
Oct 27, 2005 11:24: Marcus Malabad changed "Term asked" from "see sentence: f�r den Fall das wir zu vertreten haben..." to "f�r den Fall das wir zu vertreten haben"
Proposed translations
+1
1 hr
German term (edited):
see sentence: f�r den Fall das wir zu vertreten haben...
Selected
OK
Your solution is perfectly OK.
You may want to include that the seller obviously intends to limit the purchaser's contractual claims in connection with a breach of contract by the purchaser to the withdrawal from the contract.
"... haften wir in der Weise, dass ..." this in my opinion strongly implies "and in no other manner".
You may want to include that the seller obviously intends to limit the purchaser's contractual claims in connection with a breach of contract by the purchaser to the withdrawal from the contract.
"... haften wir in der Weise, dass ..." this in my opinion strongly implies "and in no other manner".
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Armorel Young
: good point
25 mins
|
| neutral |
Jeremy Amos
: But it doesn't state it in a manner that would be legally acceptable, for which reason I would avoid explcitly stating it in English - you can better imply it by rearranging the sentence to shift the emphasis. Also "for which we are liable".
33 mins
|
|
Yes - you're right. No explicit statement, but a stronger emphasis.
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thanks!!!"
Discussion