Interpret?

English translation: construed more narrowly

16:32 Apr 15, 2005
English to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law: Contract(s)
English term or phrase: Interpret?
What is the meaning of 'Read down" ?
If any of these Conditions of Carriage is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it will be read down to the extent necessary to ensure that it is not invalid, illegal or unenforceable, but if that is not possible, it will be severed from the Conditions of Carriage and the other conditions will remain valid.
adda
English translation:construed more narrowly
Explanation:
The following explanations will help:

However, CAW was not asking the Court to invalidate the Copyright Act but rather inviting it to "read down" the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act to preserve their constitutionality. Reading down is a technique used to maintain the constitutional validity of a legislative provision by narrowly interpreting one of its term in a fashion which does not infringe any one of the freedoms guaranteed by the Charter.
http://www.robic.ca/publications/Pdf/142.077.pdf

There is one additional consideration in the interjurisdictional immunity debate. There is some question as to whether a provincial statute should be "read down", held to be "inapplicable", or held to be "inoperative". I believe the correct term to be used is "inoperative". Reading down is a concept which is best reserved to legislation which is, but for the reading down, ultra vires. As stated above, interjurisdictional immunity assumes, at a minimum, that vires is not an issue.
http://www.constitutional-law.net/paramountcy.html

Another effective tool in the hands of judiciary, to test the validity of legislation, is to invoke the principle of “reading down”. The rule of reading down a provision of the law is now well established and recognized. It is a rule of harmonious construction in a different name. It is resorted to smoothen the crudities or ironing the creases found in a statute to make it workable. In the garb of reading down, however, it is not open to read words or expressions not found in it and thus venture into a kind of judicial legislation. The rule of reading down is to be used for the limited purpose of making a particular provision workable and to bring it in harmony with other provisions of the statute. It is to be used keeping in view the scheme of the statute and to fulfill its purposes. http://www.naavi.org/praveen_dalal/judicial_review_aug06_04....

The "reading down" doctrine requires that, whenever possible, a statute is to be interpreted as being within the power of the enacting legislative body. What this means in practice is that general language in a statute which is literally apt to extend beyond the power of the enacting Parliament or Legislature will be construed more narrowly so as to keep it within the permissible scope of power. Reading down is simply a canon of construction (or interpretation). It is only available where the language of the statute will bear the (valid) limited meaning as well as the (invalid) extended meaning; it then stipulates that the limited meaning be selected. (...) Reading down is sometimes said to depend upon a presumption of constitutionality: the enacting legislative body is presumed to have meant to enact provisions which do not transgress the limits of its constitutional powers; general language which appears to transgress the limits must therefore be "read down" so that it is confined within the limits.
http://www.capprt-tcrpap.gc.ca/decisions/tribunal/38-e.html


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 5 hrs 18 mins (2005-04-15 21:51:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

The majority concluded that New Solutions should be repaid the principal with the highest amount of interest legally allowable (i.e. 60 per cent) and that this is appropriately accomplished by notional severance – i.e., by reading down of the interest provision so that it complies with the legislation. http://www.cle.bc.ca/CLE/Analysis/Collection/04-23456-transp...

As long as the restraint is not against public policy, section 4(1) permits a court to enforce a reasonable restraint of trade covenant by reading down provisions which may on their face be too widely expressed in terms of area, time or extent. http://www.freehills.com.au/publications/publications_1478.a...
Selected response from:

Elizabeth Rudin
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:10
Grading comment
Graded automatically based on peer agreement.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
5 +6construed more narrowly
Elizabeth Rudin
4 +4amended
Kim Metzger
4 +2it will be interpreted
swisstell
4reviewed
Clauwolf
3excluded/ignored/not taken into account
hbrincker


  

Answers


5 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
read down
excluded/ignored/not taken into account


Explanation:
that's how I would read it...

hbrincker
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

21 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +4
interpret?
amended


Explanation:
Most severability clauses stipulate that invalid provisions shall be replaced with valid provisions or amended to comply with the law.
Here's an Australian contract in which "read down" is explained as "to make it valid and enforceable" i.e. it must be changed/amended.

(a) may be read down to the extent necessary to make it valid and enforceable; or
(b) may be severed and the remaining provisions of the Terms and Conditions enforced.

http://www.tenders.sa.gov.au/terms-and-conditions.vm


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 25 mins (2005-04-15 16:58:23 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Interpret simply doesn\'t work here.
\"it will be \"interpreted\" to the extent necessary to ensure that it is not invalid, illegal or unenforceable\"? How does one interpret something to the extent necessary to ensure it\'s not invalid?

Kim Metzger
Mexico
Local time: 09:10
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 72

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Refugio
57 mins

agree  Robert Donahue (X)
59 mins

agree  madak
3 hrs

agree  Shane London
13 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

4 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
interpret?
reviewed


Explanation:
:)

Clauwolf
Local time: 11:10
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in PortuguesePortuguese
PRO pts in category: 8
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +6
interpret?
construed more narrowly


Explanation:
The following explanations will help:

However, CAW was not asking the Court to invalidate the Copyright Act but rather inviting it to "read down" the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act to preserve their constitutionality. Reading down is a technique used to maintain the constitutional validity of a legislative provision by narrowly interpreting one of its term in a fashion which does not infringe any one of the freedoms guaranteed by the Charter.
http://www.robic.ca/publications/Pdf/142.077.pdf

There is one additional consideration in the interjurisdictional immunity debate. There is some question as to whether a provincial statute should be "read down", held to be "inapplicable", or held to be "inoperative". I believe the correct term to be used is "inoperative". Reading down is a concept which is best reserved to legislation which is, but for the reading down, ultra vires. As stated above, interjurisdictional immunity assumes, at a minimum, that vires is not an issue.
http://www.constitutional-law.net/paramountcy.html

Another effective tool in the hands of judiciary, to test the validity of legislation, is to invoke the principle of “reading down”. The rule of reading down a provision of the law is now well established and recognized. It is a rule of harmonious construction in a different name. It is resorted to smoothen the crudities or ironing the creases found in a statute to make it workable. In the garb of reading down, however, it is not open to read words or expressions not found in it and thus venture into a kind of judicial legislation. The rule of reading down is to be used for the limited purpose of making a particular provision workable and to bring it in harmony with other provisions of the statute. It is to be used keeping in view the scheme of the statute and to fulfill its purposes. http://www.naavi.org/praveen_dalal/judicial_review_aug06_04....

The "reading down" doctrine requires that, whenever possible, a statute is to be interpreted as being within the power of the enacting legislative body. What this means in practice is that general language in a statute which is literally apt to extend beyond the power of the enacting Parliament or Legislature will be construed more narrowly so as to keep it within the permissible scope of power. Reading down is simply a canon of construction (or interpretation). It is only available where the language of the statute will bear the (valid) limited meaning as well as the (invalid) extended meaning; it then stipulates that the limited meaning be selected. (...) Reading down is sometimes said to depend upon a presumption of constitutionality: the enacting legislative body is presumed to have meant to enact provisions which do not transgress the limits of its constitutional powers; general language which appears to transgress the limits must therefore be "read down" so that it is confined within the limits.
http://www.capprt-tcrpap.gc.ca/decisions/tribunal/38-e.html


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 5 hrs 18 mins (2005-04-15 21:51:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

The majority concluded that New Solutions should be repaid the principal with the highest amount of interest legally allowable (i.e. 60 per cent) and that this is appropriately accomplished by notional severance – i.e., by reading down of the interest provision so that it complies with the legislation. http://www.cle.bc.ca/CLE/Analysis/Collection/04-23456-transp...

As long as the restraint is not against public policy, section 4(1) permits a court to enforce a reasonable restraint of trade covenant by reading down provisions which may on their face be too widely expressed in terms of area, time or extent. http://www.freehills.com.au/publications/publications_1478.a...


Elizabeth Rudin
United Kingdom
Local time: 15:10
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in HungarianHungarian, Native in RomanianRomanian
PRO pts in category: 12
Grading comment
Graded automatically based on peer agreement.

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  humbird: Impressive reference!
2 hrs
  -> Thank you, humbird.

agree  Robert Donahue (X)
2 hrs
  -> Thank you, Robert.

agree  Kim Metzger: Excellent research, Elizabeth. "Reading down" can mean construing by courts, but this is a contract that says "it will be read down to the EXTENT NECESSARY to ensure that it is not invalid ...." How would the parties construe it to the extent necessary?
3 hrs
  -> I added a couple of contract law references - perhaps these are clearer. "Reading down" comes close to "notional severance", and the actual extent and manner of "narrowing" a clause to save it from becoming invalid depends on the content and circumstances

agree  Charlie Bavington (X): seems totally clear to me.
3 hrs
  -> Thank you, Charlie.

agree  Saleh Chowdhury, Ph.D.
8 hrs
  -> Thank you, Saleh.

agree  Java Cafe
3 days 19 hrs
  -> Thank you.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

6 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +2
interpret?
it will be interpreted


Explanation:
exactly

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 hrs 26 mins (2005-04-15 22:59:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

references? no. Logic, yes.

swisstell
Italy
Local time: 16:10
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: German

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
neutral  Kim Metzger: On what basis did you arrive at this conclusion? Any references to "read down"?
7 mins

agree  Can Altinbay: I almost posted my own, but this does tell the story. It means the clause(s) will be interpreted in a smaller scope so that what make them illegal is gone. If that's not possible, they''ll ignore the clause(s) all together.
10 mins
  -> thank you, Can

agree  mannix
1 hr
  -> thanks, mannix
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.

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:

Your current localization setting

English

Select a language

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