Nov 17, 2012 16:47
11 yrs ago
402 viewers *
Spanish term
REUNIDOS De una parte ... Y de otra parte
Spanish to English
Law/Patents
Law: Contract(s)
Sorry if this is long-winded but I'd like to settle this formula once and for all, so I'm hoping colleagues who translate agreements for Spain can set me straight on this format. I have seen the ProZ glossary entries but part of my problem is that the preamble doesn't begin with the title of the agreement, but if it did, I'd prefer to say something like "Sponsorship Agreement made by and between", and then simply name the parties.
I have found translations (see below) of agreements using the same or similar formats but I'm not convinced.
The format of my document is as follows:
"[date]
REUNIDOS
De una parte, XXX y XXX, mayores de edad, de nacionalidad española, con DNI núms. XXX y XXX, respectivamente, y con domicilio a estos efectos en AAA.
Y asimismo, XXX, y XXX, mayores de edad, de nacionalidad española, con DNI núm. XXX y DNI núm XXX, respectivamente, con domicilio a estos efectos en AAA.
Y de otra parte, YYY y YYY, mayores de edad, con domicilio a estos efectos en BBB, y provistos, respectivamente, de DNI números XXX y XXX
INTERVIENEN
XXX y XXX, en nombre y representación de la sociedad XXX S.L. (en adelante, “XXX”), con domicilio en AAA y C.I.F núm. X-XXX, en sus calidades de Presidente y Consejero, respectivamente.
XXX, y XXX en nombre y representación de la entidad XXX, (en adelante, “XXX”), en sus calidades de Director General y Director de Gabinete de Presidencia respectivamente, actuando en uso de las facultades conferidas mediante escrituras de poder otorgadas ante el Notario de XXX XXX, en fecha XXX y XXX, con número de Protocolo XXX, y XXX respectivamente, con domicilio en XXX y C.I.F núm. XX.
YYY y YY actuando ambos en nombre y representación de la mercantil YYY, S.A. (en adelante, “YYY”), con domicilio social en XXX, en su calidad respectiva de Procuradores de la entidad.
Todas las partes con el carácter y representación en que respectivamente intervienen, se reconocen la capacidad legal necesaria para contratar y obligarse en derecho y a tal efecto
EXPONEN
I.- Que XXX. es una entidad deportiva, titular de su propio derecho de imagen institucional, incluyendo los derechos de explotación comercial de la misma."
Here's a translation of this formula
APPEARING
On the one hand Mr. Miguel Angel Jimenez de Velasco-Mazarlo
...
And on the other hand
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1257803/0000950123040... ¿
Some EUR-Lex documents treat this differently and I'm inclined to agree with those that don't translate it at all:
ACUERDO
de Cooperación Científica y Tecnológica entre la Comunidad Europea y el Gobierno del Reino Hachemí de Jordania
Reunidos, ***de una parte***,
la Comunidad Europea (en lo sucesivo denominada «la Comunidad»),
***y de otra***
AGREEMENT
on Scientific & Technological Cooperation between the European Community and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
The European Community, (hereinafter referred to as the "Community") ***on the one part***,
And
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (hereinafter referred to as "Jordan"), ***on the other part***,
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&lng1=en,...
Here's one where they haven't translated it, i.e. they just name the parties and use "and":
ACUERDO de asociación en el sector pesquero entre la Comunidad Europea y la República de Guinea
Reunidos, ***de una parte***
LA REPÚBLICA DE GUINEA, en lo sucesivo denominada «Guinea»,
***y de otra***
LA COMUNIDAD EUROPEA, en lo sucesivo denominada «la Comunidad»,
FISHERIES PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT between the Republic of Guinea and the European Community
THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA, hereinafter referred to as "Guinea",
***and***
THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY, hereinafter referred to as "the Community",
hereinafter referred to as "the Parties",
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&lng1=en,...
Here's another that uses the "APPEARING ON THE ONE HAND:" formula (which I don't like) http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1257803/0000950123040...
BTW, for " INTERVIENEN" I've used "THE PARTIES APPEAR IN THE FOLLOWING CAPACITIES" as they are exactly the same parties named under " REUNIDOS" but with their corresponding capacities.
and for "EXPONEN" I've use our old friend FVS' formula
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/spanish_to_english/law:_contracts/...
Your suggestions are appreciated!
I have found translations (see below) of agreements using the same or similar formats but I'm not convinced.
The format of my document is as follows:
"[date]
REUNIDOS
De una parte, XXX y XXX, mayores de edad, de nacionalidad española, con DNI núms. XXX y XXX, respectivamente, y con domicilio a estos efectos en AAA.
Y asimismo, XXX, y XXX, mayores de edad, de nacionalidad española, con DNI núm. XXX y DNI núm XXX, respectivamente, con domicilio a estos efectos en AAA.
Y de otra parte, YYY y YYY, mayores de edad, con domicilio a estos efectos en BBB, y provistos, respectivamente, de DNI números XXX y XXX
INTERVIENEN
XXX y XXX, en nombre y representación de la sociedad XXX S.L. (en adelante, “XXX”), con domicilio en AAA y C.I.F núm. X-XXX, en sus calidades de Presidente y Consejero, respectivamente.
XXX, y XXX en nombre y representación de la entidad XXX, (en adelante, “XXX”), en sus calidades de Director General y Director de Gabinete de Presidencia respectivamente, actuando en uso de las facultades conferidas mediante escrituras de poder otorgadas ante el Notario de XXX XXX, en fecha XXX y XXX, con número de Protocolo XXX, y XXX respectivamente, con domicilio en XXX y C.I.F núm. XX.
YYY y YY actuando ambos en nombre y representación de la mercantil YYY, S.A. (en adelante, “YYY”), con domicilio social en XXX, en su calidad respectiva de Procuradores de la entidad.
Todas las partes con el carácter y representación en que respectivamente intervienen, se reconocen la capacidad legal necesaria para contratar y obligarse en derecho y a tal efecto
EXPONEN
I.- Que XXX. es una entidad deportiva, titular de su propio derecho de imagen institucional, incluyendo los derechos de explotación comercial de la misma."
Here's a translation of this formula
APPEARING
On the one hand Mr. Miguel Angel Jimenez de Velasco-Mazarlo
...
And on the other hand
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1257803/0000950123040... ¿
Some EUR-Lex documents treat this differently and I'm inclined to agree with those that don't translate it at all:
ACUERDO
de Cooperación Científica y Tecnológica entre la Comunidad Europea y el Gobierno del Reino Hachemí de Jordania
Reunidos, ***de una parte***,
la Comunidad Europea (en lo sucesivo denominada «la Comunidad»),
***y de otra***
AGREEMENT
on Scientific & Technological Cooperation between the European Community and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
The European Community, (hereinafter referred to as the "Community") ***on the one part***,
And
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (hereinafter referred to as "Jordan"), ***on the other part***,
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&lng1=en,...
Here's one where they haven't translated it, i.e. they just name the parties and use "and":
ACUERDO de asociación en el sector pesquero entre la Comunidad Europea y la República de Guinea
Reunidos, ***de una parte***
LA REPÚBLICA DE GUINEA, en lo sucesivo denominada «Guinea»,
***y de otra***
LA COMUNIDAD EUROPEA, en lo sucesivo denominada «la Comunidad»,
FISHERIES PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT between the Republic of Guinea and the European Community
THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA, hereinafter referred to as "Guinea",
***and***
THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY, hereinafter referred to as "the Community",
hereinafter referred to as "the Parties",
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&lng1=en,...
Here's another that uses the "APPEARING ON THE ONE HAND:" formula (which I don't like) http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1257803/0000950123040...
BTW, for " INTERVIENEN" I've used "THE PARTIES APPEAR IN THE FOLLOWING CAPACITIES" as they are exactly the same parties named under " REUNIDOS" but with their corresponding capacities.
and for "EXPONEN" I've use our old friend FVS' formula
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/spanish_to_english/law:_contracts/...
Your suggestions are appreciated!
Proposed translations
(English)
Proposed translations
+3
32 mins
Selected
BETWEEN (1) [first party details] AND (2) [second party details]
As in:
BETWEEN
(1) [first party details]
AND
(2) [second party details]
I believe in keeping it simple in accordance with the trend towards 'plain English' in legal writing. Personally I don't think there's any need for 'BY AND' or for 'de una parte... y de otra parte' to be translated into words.
In support I would cite the model Service Agreement on page 86 of McKay, Charlton and Barsoum, Legal English 2nd ed (2011) and the model agreements on pages 687 and 689 of Bossini, Gleeson and Arana, Bilingual Dictionary of Legal Terms 5th ed (2008).
Even the numbers are not strictly necessary but they do help when one party actually consists of more than one person, as in your text.
Hope that helps!
BETWEEN
(1) [first party details]
AND
(2) [second party details]
I believe in keeping it simple in accordance with the trend towards 'plain English' in legal writing. Personally I don't think there's any need for 'BY AND' or for 'de una parte... y de otra parte' to be translated into words.
In support I would cite the model Service Agreement on page 86 of McKay, Charlton and Barsoum, Legal English 2nd ed (2011) and the model agreements on pages 687 and 689 of Bossini, Gleeson and Arana, Bilingual Dictionary of Legal Terms 5th ed (2008).
Even the numbers are not strictly necessary but they do help when one party actually consists of more than one person, as in your text.
Hope that helps!
Peer comment(s):
agree |
philgoddard
: Sadly, a lot of translators still believe you should translate antiquated legalese with antiquated legalese.
12 hrs
|
agree |
Morwenna81
: Incluso añadiría "by and " antes de "between". Quedaría: "by and between" y ordenaría los datos de las partes igual que aparece en la explicación
1 day 13 hrs
|
agree |
Lorena Gaztelumendi López
2543 days
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thanks, Rod. Please see latest discussion entry."
15 mins
ASSEMBLED One party... And the other party
I've absolutely no idea whether or not there's an 'official' format, but I've been using this for years and no one has ever complained.
If there is a special way to word it, I also would love to know!
If there is a special way to word it, I also would love to know!
+6
25 mins
BY AND BETWEEN - As party of the first part... As party of the second part
There are other possibilities
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Yvonne Gallagher
: yes, with "Agreement" before it//Actually, to be exact, the formula I use is "The party of" as James says below...
4 mins
|
thanks :)
|
|
agree |
Triston Goodwin
: This is also how you will typically see it in contracts written in English. In my opinion this is the best option.
19 mins
|
Thanks :)
|
|
agree |
Andy Watkinson
43 mins
|
Thanks :)
|
|
agree |
Mónica Algazi
: Uso esta fórmula a diario.
1 hr
|
gracias :)
|
|
agree |
James A. Walsh
: "The party of..." (rather than "as") is the standard formula I use.
1 hr
|
Thanks :)
|
|
neutral |
philgoddard
: 'Party' and 'part' both mean the same thing, and 'by and between' is also a tautology.
13 hrs
|
agree |
hfmg
1220 days
|
35 mins
on the one hand... on the other hand
also
5 hrs
ASSEMBLED Of the one part ... And of the other part
REUNIDOS: the parties are actually present.
Two parties: of the one and other part (UK); of the first and second part (US).
More than two parties in the UK e.g. in an unregd. land Deed of Purchase: of the first, second, third etc. part.
This is an EN legal drafting technique and this counterbalancing of parties cannot be left out.
It is surprising that translators still have a problem with this formulation.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 hrs (2012-11-17 22:52:29 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
This is a set formula in EN legal drafting, as contained in US/UK manuals and used in EN contract practice. Whatever answer is chosen will make no difference,
Two parties: of the one and other part (UK); of the first and second part (US).
More than two parties in the UK e.g. in an unregd. land Deed of Purchase: of the first, second, third etc. part.
This is an EN legal drafting technique and this counterbalancing of parties cannot be left out.
It is surprising that translators still have a problem with this formulation.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 hrs (2012-11-17 22:52:29 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
This is a set formula in EN legal drafting, as contained in US/UK manuals and used in EN contract practice. Whatever answer is chosen will make no difference,
Example sentence:
between the CARIFORUM States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member. States, of the other part. 30.10.2008. EN. Official Journal
Reference:
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/french_to_english/law%3A_contracts/5009686-de_premi%C3%A8re_part.html
Note from asker:
It's not so much about translators still having problems, but rather comparing new solutions, taking into account that, fortunately, legal writing is increasingly being simplified with solutions such as those used in EUR - Lex translations. See "Reunidos, de una parte" http://tiny.cc/04vxnw and http://tiny.cc/b6vxnw |
Peer comment(s):
neutral |
AllegroTrans
: Can't recall having seen an EN contract commencing with a past participle; surely there's a better way to express this?
19 hrs
|
Charles D.'s points of by and between for reunidos are valid. But the question is two-pronged and conflates reunidos and the parties.
|
Discussion
I would add that other suggestions and points of view here are valid and would work well in other situations. Thanks to everyone for your contributions.
BTW, I came across this which may be a good read: The Party of the First Part: The Curious World of Legalese http://www.amazon.com/The-Party-First-Part-Legalese/dp/08050...
Cheers all!
Of course "by and between" is not an accurate translation of "reunidos", but I personally used "agreement made by and between" and I wonder if an agreement can be "made" without the "presence" of the parties and/or their representatives?
Tom, as to the readership, it's a sponsorship agreement between a Spanish football club and a sponsor (from an English speaking company), so it was obviously drafted by the Spanish party and the translation is obviously for the English sponsor, so I think what needs delivering here (and I think this is the case with many agreement translations), is a translation in a using typical format and language consistent with agreements drafted in English, insofar as possible.
The parties to contracts are usually legal persons, such as companies, and they are actually signed by the parties’ legal representatives. Now, “By and between” is usually followed by the names of the parties. So is “Reunidos”, sometimes (such as the European Union in Rich’s example, and one can find others from within Spain), but usually it is followed by the names of the representatives, with their DNI numbers and addresses. These representatives execute the contract, but they are not, strictly, the parties. So can we say that the contract is “by and between” the representatives? Or does it depend on some other factor? Never mind for now whether “by and” is redundant.
The same thing happens with this every time it comes up. Here are the three main previous questions:
1. http://www.proz.com/kudoz/spanish_to_english/law_patents/755...
2. http://www.proz.com/kudoz/spanish_to_english/law:_contracts/...
3. http://www.proz.com/kudoz/spanish_to_english/law:_contracts/...
The overwhelming majority view is that “Reunidos” should be translated “By and between”. But voices are raised in favour of “Assembled” (or some synonym like “Convened” or “Present”), and in question 3 “Assembled” was chosen and made it into the glossary. Most people disagreed with this, and some were very annoyed about it.
Here we are again: “By and between” is the majority choice. But Tom, a barrister and very experienced lawyer, says it should be “Assembled”, on the grounds that it indicates that the persons named were present, and that makes me wonder.
(continued in next post)
'of the first and second part' is right for the US store.westlaw.com/pdf/perspec/fall20011.pdf but not for the UK if there are just 2 parties.
I've already mentioned the BrE and AmE divide.
'Two parties: of the one and other part (UK); of the first and second part (US).'
"You should have come to the first party. We didn't get home till around four in the morning."
You've gotta love those cats!
MR XXX and MR XXX, both of legal age and Spanish nationality, with National Identity Card ...
Together with, MR XXX and MR XXX, both of legal age and Spanish nationality, with ...
And the other party, MR XXX and MR XXX, both of legal age, with domicile...
Using "Together with" to show they form one (the first) party, and using "And the other party" to separate the parties into two.
Although "As party of the.." is widely used, I can't say I'm a fan.
e.g. "The said party of the second part shall pay to the party of the first part, whenever he shall negotiate, sell, or place said mines to any assignee of the said party of the second part, forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000), and in addition thereto"
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/203/120/
Thanks to everyone for your input :)
But my point, really, is that settling this once and for all is a vain hope. All you’re going to get is the preferences and practices of whoever happens to tune in today. There is no single right way of doing these things. I have to confess that “the party of the first part/second part” always reminds me of the Marx Brothers, but I can’t see that there’s anything wrong with it if you like it. Our vastly experienced legal colleagues who’ve done thousands of contracts don’t all do things the same way as each other, as we see constantly on this forum. They just decide what suits them and do it every time. Who’s to say which is better? I’m not saying that anything goes, but there is a legitimate range of options. So I’m not going to vote on this one.
Agreement (as a header, if it is there)
date
Made and entered by and between (this would replace reunidos, in my humble opinion any direct version of "reunidos" sounds like a translation and this is a standard formula in English)
The party of the first part
The party of the second part
The party of the third part
party of the second part n. a reference to one of the parties to a written contract, as distinguished from "the party of the first part."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/party of the s...