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.
13:54 May 28, 2011
Portuguese to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Insurance / legal terminology
Portuguese term or phrase:a contestante aduz
This phrase (legalise?) keeps occuring in a legal report refuting claims by the plaintiff that the traffic accident was caused by faulty parts of the car.
I understand what they are saying but have some doubts as to the best way to present this in a technical manner so to speak?
I quote the actual context belwow:
Por outro lado, a contestante aduz não poder ser responsabilizada também pelo fato de o veículo não mais comportar sua originalidade na ocasião do acidente.
Explanation: Yes, CONTESTANTE is just another term for "autor" in a lawsuit which is PLAINTIFF as you correctly translated. See:
PARTES – FORMA DE IDENTIFICAÇÃO
Qual seria o mais correto para identificar as partes na contestação?
Contestante e Contestado
Autor e Réu
Contestante e Autor
ou o nome das partes ex: Félix e Ana
Nereida,
Não há mais correto.
Procure alternar entre os termos para não ficar repetitiva. Não sugiro que se refira às partes pelo nome. Pode se usar também demandante e demandado, peticionante, requerente e requerido (estes, especialmente, se for procedimento de jurisdição voluntária).
Quando houver mais de uma pessoa ocupando o mesmo polo na relação jurídica processual e você quiser se referir à apenas um deles use: Primeiro autor, segundo autor, primeiro réu, segundo réu, conforme a ordem que apareçam no corpo da petição.
Re: aduzir = literally ADDUCE ....obviously not used nowadays
An allegation (also called adduction) is a claim of a fact by a party in a pleading, which the party claims to be able to prove. Allegations remain assertions without proof, until they can be proved.[1]
I thank the in put from everyone on this, and I believe we all on the same track more or less so I give the endorsement to Gilmar purely because he was first to give his answer. 4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
when you say contestante is "quem contesta" but as I said earlier this confusing term can only be clarified by reading the full context and checking who filed the claim/lawsuit. It's not like "autor e réu" or "requerente e requerido/a" where it's straightforward Plaintiff and Defendant. We both have a 50/50 chance of being right/wrong :)
But that does not necessarily mean that the contestante is a Defendant. If a counterclaim/reconvenção is made in the proceedings the Claimant/Plaintiff will be the contestante.
Plaintiff no doubt, but what would said phrase be?
05:05 May 29, 2011
From the submitted fragment, it does seem clear that the correct term for "contestante" in this context would be plaintiff (not defendant), even if she is seeking to refute an allegation by another party (which might itself be a plaintiff in another setting).
However, if I may be indulged at all, I confess to being somewhat curious: does the phrase "a contestante aduz" appear several times? It's not impossible, but it seems unlikely. If not, it would be good to know exactly what phrase is being referred to. Maybe someone could shed some light on that as well.
I suppose there are different interpretations of these two terms. If you google them and take the time to read you will see it can certainly get confusing. The only one that can really ascertain this would be Andrew(with the full source text) by checking which party in fact initiated the lawsuit and that obviously would be the PLAINTIFF.
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
1 hr confidence:
the plaintiff alleges
Explanation: Yes, CONTESTANTE is just another term for "autor" in a lawsuit which is PLAINTIFF as you correctly translated. See:
PARTES – FORMA DE IDENTIFICAÇÃO
Qual seria o mais correto para identificar as partes na contestação?
Contestante e Contestado
Autor e Réu
Contestante e Autor
ou o nome das partes ex: Félix e Ana
Nereida,
Não há mais correto.
Procure alternar entre os termos para não ficar repetitiva. Não sugiro que se refira às partes pelo nome. Pode se usar também demandante e demandado, peticionante, requerente e requerido (estes, especialmente, se for procedimento de jurisdição voluntária).
Quando houver mais de uma pessoa ocupando o mesmo polo na relação jurídica processual e você quiser se referir à apenas um deles use: Primeiro autor, segundo autor, primeiro réu, segundo réu, conforme a ordem que apareçam no corpo da petição.
Re: aduzir = literally ADDUCE ....obviously not used nowadays
An allegation (also called adduction) is a claim of a fact by a party in a pleading, which the party claims to be able to prove. Allegations remain assertions without proof, until they can be proved.[1]
Gilmar Fernandes United States Local time: 07:04 Native speaker of: Portuguese, English PRO pts in category: 55
Grading comment
I thank the in put from everyone on this, and I believe we all on the same track more or less so I give the endorsement to Gilmar purely because he was first to give his answer.
Explanation: Contestante means defendant, cf. Chaves de Mello, Dicionário Jurídico, and Deocleciano Torrieri Guimarães Dicionário Técnico Jurídico. You could use claims instead of alleges.
MARK ROBERTSON Local time: 12:04 Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 16
Explanation: In fact "aduzir" is "to adduce", which is NOT "to allege" but rather, to bring up or present proof/reasons/witnesses. From Dicionário Aurélio:
However - and here it gets tricky - I suspect the writer is using it wrongly (didn't check the dictionary), because "aduzir" requires both a direct object (what is being presented) and an indirect one (to whom is that being presented). While "não poder ser responsabilizada..." could perhaps be accepted as the direct object, the indirect one is missing. That leads me to believe that the writer is trying to replace the verb "adicionar" with the fancier verb "aduzir", not knowing it's not the same thing (should have looked it up). Wouldn't be the first time a lawyer - or some other person writing in "legalese" - went overboard and screwed up by trying to sound important. My money is on "the plaintiff adds".
coolbrowne United States Local time: 07:04 Native speaker of: English, Portuguese PRO pts in category: 4
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +1
