KudoZ home » German to English » Law (general)

ohne grobe Fahrlässigkeit erlangen musste

English translation: would have become aware had it not been for gross negligence

Advertisement

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.
10:29 Oct 27, 2006
German to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law (general)
German term or phrase: ohne grobe Fahrlässigkeit erlangen musste
Taken from a user agreement. This seems to be a standard phrase in German, but I'm really having trouble finding the German equivalent. Any ideas?

"Bei anderen, nicht durch einen Mangel bedingten Ansprüchen auf Schadensersatz und Ersatz vergeblicher Aufwendungen beträgt die Verjährungsfrist ein Jahr, beginnend ab dem Zeitpunkt, zu dem der Käufer von den anspruchsbegründenden Umständen Kenntnis erlangt hat oder ohne grobe Fahrlässigkeit erlangen musste, wenn der Käufer ein Unternehmer i.S. von Ziffer 2.1. ist."
Adam Dean
Local time: 01:11
English translation:would have become aware had it not been for gross negligence
Explanation:
commencing on the date when the purchaser became aware of the circumstances that gave rise to the claim or would have become aware had it not been for gross negligence on his or her part

http://www.proz.com/kudoz/96133
Selected response from:

Lancashireman
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:11
Grading comment
3 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
3 +3would have become aware had it not been for gross negligenceLancashireman
4had obtained knowledge without gross negligence on his partValeska Nygren
4must have become aware of had he not been grossly negligentM-A-Z
3 -1or ought to have learned in the absence of gross negligencegangels
1 -1should have known without being grossly negligent
Jonathan MacKerron


  

Answers


41 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5 peer agreement (net): +3
would have become aware had it not been for gross negligence


Explanation:
commencing on the date when the purchaser became aware of the circumstances that gave rise to the claim or would have become aware had it not been for gross negligence on his or her part

http://www.proz.com/kudoz/96133


Lancashireman
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:11
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 288

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  David Hollywood
23 mins

agree  Ingeborg Gowans
1 hr

neutral  M-A-Z: "had it not been for" implies that the buyer was in fact negligent and did not become aware of it, which is not the case. "musste" = He was bound to notice it and if he didn't he was negligent - the German wording leaves it open what the buyer does!
2 hrs
  -> Re your own 1st answer: ‘müssen’ doesn’t always translate directly as ‘must’. Re 2nd answer: don’t believe everything you read in the grammar books about ‘should’ and ‘would’. Formation of conditional clauses in English can also be quite demanding work.

agree  David Moore
7 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

44 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 1/5Answerer confidence 1/5 peer agreement (net): -1
should have known without being grossly negligent


Explanation:
in so many words

Jonathan MacKerron
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 181

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
disagree  M-A-Z: The concept of "Kenntnis erlangen ab einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt" is not covered by "have known"
2 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

46 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5 peer agreement (net): -1
...ohne grobe Fahrlässigkeit erlangen musste...
or ought to have learned in the absence of gross negligence


Explanation:
In instances of claims seeking damages or indemnification for futile efforts/expenses other than those relating to defects, the grace period shall be in force for 12 months, commencing with the date purchaser learned of the circumstances on which his claim is based, or ought to have learned so in the absence of gross negligence if purchaser is a business owner falling under fig.2.1.

gangels
Local time: 18:11
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish, Native in GermanGerman
PRO pts in category: 229

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
disagree  M-A-Z: IMO "ought to" is too weak an expression. It implies that it is morally right or the sensible thing to do, while "musste" implies that it is inevitable (regardless of morals and common sense)
2 hrs

neutral  Lancashireman: Disagree with the above comment. Of course 'ought to' can be used in the sense of ‘logically’ in addition to ‘morally’. The English modal auxiliaries are very bit as difficult for a non-native speaker to use correctly as the German.
8 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

3 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
must have become aware of had he not been grossly negligent


Explanation:


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 Stunden (2006-10-27 13:55:09 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Sorry, I pressed the "send"-button too early. My proposal should read

"should have become aware of had he not been grossly negligent"

M-A-Z
Local time: 02:11
Works in field
PRO pts in category: 4
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

4 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
had obtained knowledge without gross negligence on his part


Explanation:
... the buyer had become aware/obtained knowledge or should have become aware/obtained knowledge without gross negligence on his part.

so verstehe ich die Zeitenkonstruktion und "on his part" macht es klarer

Valeska Nygren
United States
Local time: 19:11
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in GermanGerman, Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 8

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
neutral  M-A-Z: Bei "without gross negligence on his part" ist in meinen Augen der Sinn ebenso unklar wie im deutschen Original
1 hr
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


Changes made by editors
Oct 27, 2006 - Changes made by Marcus Malabad:
Term asked...ohne grobe Fahrlässigkeit erlangen musste... » ohne grobe Fahrlässigkeit erlangen musste


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search