02:01 Jul 14, 2000 |
German to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Selected response from: Dr. Sahib Bleher Local time: 01:23 | |||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
na | see below |
| ||
na | See below |
| ||
na | Added note |
| ||
na | see below |
|
see below Explanation: To start with Haftungstatbestand, I would translate it as actual liability or de facto liability. Now for the sentence, I would put: With respect to third party dealings, not company X, but company Y is liable for a neglect of duty by company X. Hope this helps. |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
See below Explanation: "In terms of relationships to third parties, a breach of official duty does not render X liable, but Y." Based on Romain's definition that "Tatbestand" can also be rendered "elements of an offense," maybe something like "particulars of the liability" or "particulars of so-and-so's liability" would work. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
Added note Explanation: "In terms of relationships to third parties, a breach of official duty ON THE PART OF X does not render X liable, but Y." Sorry about the omission. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
see below Explanation: Haftungstatbestand means the liability situation, not the liability itself. E.g.: "The liability situation is that the failure of company X to meet its official obligations does not render X liable to third parties, but rather Y." The URL below explains why this can be. Reference: http://ifa-verlag.de/QUALIFIZ/WEITERBI/FORTBILD/AEVO/DOZENTE... |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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.