dépens avec distraction
English translation: litigation expenses advanced by appellee's counsel
| 01:05 Feb 21, 2019 |
| French to English translations [PRO] Law (general) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|  Selected response from: Eliza Hall United States Local time: 15:57 | ||||||
Grading comment
| |||||||
| Summary of answers provided | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | litigation expenses advanced by appellee's counsel |
|
| Summary of reference entries provided | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| solicitor’s lien for costs, diversion of costs, distraction of costs |
|
| Discussion entries: 10 | |
|---|---|
Answers
3 hrs confidence: 
litigation expenses advanced by appellee's counsel Explanation: "La 'distraction' est le droit donné par la loi à un à un avocat de prélever sur les sommes auxquelles l'adversaire de son client a été condamné, la part des dépens dont il a fait l'avance." https://www.dictionnaire-juridique.com/definition/distractio... In the US, attorneys don't generally pay litigation costs unless they're working under a contingency agreement (i.e., the plaintiff pays little or nothing unless the lawyer wins, and then the lawyer gets a significant percentage of the winnings -- typically 30-33% -- plus any costs the lawyer may have paid, such as expert witness fees or filing fees). See "Operating Under a Contingency Fee Agreement" here: https://law.freeadvice.com/litigation/litigation/lawyer_cont... In cases where a party's lawyer paid litigation costs, you just call that litigation expenses advanced by X's counsel. Since Marau's case is referring to the appellee's demand that the appellant be ordered to pay something, it's obviously appellee's counsel that we're talking about. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs (2019-02-21 04:19:51 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- PS: contingency cases are the type of case where "la distraction" would happen -- i.e. the court would order the losing defendant to pay the plaintiff $X, and that money would be paid directly to plaintiff's lawyer, who would deduct their contingency fees and litigation expenses from it and forward the remaining money to the client. In non-contingency cases, i.e. most cases, counsel pays some fees directly (e.g. the $400 it takes to file a federal lawsuit, travel costs, or the cost to rent a room for a deposition) and then immediately bills the client for those expenses the following month. The client then pays for them -- not from any settlement or winnings in the case, but just from their own bank account. That's not "distraction des dépens," because it doesn't come out of settlement or judgment monies. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 day 14 hrs (2019-02-22 15:35:26 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- PPS note to Daryo: no to your proposed "with the right..." translation, because of context. The original text isn't discussing the lawyer's right or what dépens avec distraction is; it's just listing it as one of the two types of expenses that Party A has asked the court to order Party B to pay. When a party to litigation asks a court to award costs and/or money damages, in their request they spell out each category of costs, in order to justify the total number. The original text here says that the appellee has demanded the "condamnation de [l'appelant] au paiement [d'une certaine somme] au titre des frais irrépétibles de première instance et d'appel ainsi qu'aux dépens avec distraction." Or in English: the appellee has demanded "that the appellant be ordered to pay [XYZ amount of money] for [frais irrépétibles, see link] and litigation expenses advanced by appellee's counsel." IOW it's not saying lawyers have a right to anything; it's just naming the category of expenses. The OP didn't ask for a translation of frais irrépétibles, but here's a link explaining what those are: https://www.courdecassation.fr/publi..._610_1869/ |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
| Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) | ||
Reference comments
1 day 2 hrs |
| Reference: solicitor’s lien for costs, diversion of costs, distraction of costs Reference information: [34] The decision in Reid v. Cupper, supra, addressing in part the effect of a solicitor"s lien for costs in an unsuccessful appeal… [39] However, a solicitor"s lien for costs was not advanced before me. …l’effet du privilège de l’avocat pour les dépens… demande de privilège de l’avocat pour les dépens… http://canlii.ca/t/44qd there is apparently no solicitor's lien for costs in issue Il ne semble pas y avoir de réclamation de privilège de l’avocat pour les dépens… http://canlii.ca/t/1n3p5 Autres résultats https://www.canlii.org/en/#search/text="solicitor’s lien for... …Rule 400(7) is clear: costs are awarded to the party, not to its solicitor… the Court stipulates at pages 65 and 66 [translation]: …Unlike section 479 of the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure, the Federal Court Rules do not provide for diversion of costs to the solicitors of the party that is entitled to them… there is no need to make up for any failing from a lack of a provision on diversion of costs to one party’s solicitors… …la Règle 400(7) est sans ambiguïté : les dépens sont adjugés à la partie, non à son avocat… la Cour stipule aux pages 65 et 66 : …À la différence de l’article 479 du Code de procédure civile du Québec, les Règles de la Cour fédérale ne prévoient pas la distraction des dépens en faveur des avocats de la partie qui y a droit… il n’y a lieu de suppléer à aucune omission du fait de l’absence d’une disposition sur la distraction des dépens en faveur des avocats d’une partie… https://www.canlii.org/fr/ca/caf/doc/2010/2010caf351/2010caf... I would confirm the judgment of the Court of Review in its entirety, thus allowing the appeal with costs against the respondents, costs in Queen's Bench to be also against present respondents distraction of costs in all the courts to L. P. Guillet Esq., plaintiff and appellant's attorney; http://canlii.ca/t/g7z5h …condemned to pay and satisfy unto him the sum of… with interest… and costs distraits to the undersigned… condemn the appellants… to pay to the respondent… his costs in the Superior Court, and on his inscription in review, of which costs distraction is granted to Mtre. J. M. MacDougall, his attorney, but doth condemn the respondent to pay to the appellants the costs of their inscription in review, and the court on motion of Mtre. Henry Aylen, attorney for appellants, doth grant him distraction of costs. http://canlii.ca/t/g7xsq Every condemnation to costs involves, by operation of law, distraction in favour of the attorney of the party to whom they are awarded. La condamnation aux dépens emporte de plein droit distraction en faveur du procureur de la partie à laquelle ils sont accordés. https://www.canlii.org/en/qc/laws/stat/cqlr-c-c-25/latest/cq... |
| ||
Note to reference poster
| |||
| 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:
Search millions of term translations