KudoZ home » French to English » Real Estate

être appéle à l'acte

English translation: deed...subject to the Lessor's consent...

Advertisement

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.
09:20 Nov 27, 2008
French to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Real Estate
French term or phrase: être appéle à l'acte
from a commercial lease:

"toute cession (...) devra en outre être réalisée
par acte authentique ou sous seing privé auquel le Bailleur sera appelé et dont une copie lui sera remise, sans frais pour lui."

I see this has come up before, but I'm not convinced it necessarily means actually being a party to the contract. Might it not just mean "in the presence of"?

Support for and explanation of suggested answers welcome!
Eutychus
Local time: 20:58
English translation:deed...subject to the Lessor's consent...
Explanation:
It appears from comments below (see link) that the French law requires the Lessor's consent. In the case in question different courts had different opinions on whether a tacit approval (by implicative actions/omissions) is sufficient or it needs to be explicit but there is no doubt among them that the Lessor's agreement is required.


L'article L. 145-31 du Code de commerce, après avoir rappelé le principe de l'interdiction de la sous-location, dispose que : « En cas de sous-location autorisée, le bailleur est appelé à concourir à l'acte ».

Il en résulte que lorsque la sous-location est formellement autorisée par le bail, le propriétaire doit être appelé à concourir à l'acte de sous-location.

S'agissant d'une formalité substantielle, la simple connaissance par le bailleur du sous-locataire ne saurait valoir agrément tacite.

En effet, l'autorisation de principe d'une sous-location et la simple connaissance de la sous-location par le bailleur ne peuvent être assimilées au concours à l'acte, pas plus qu'elles ne sauraient valoir agrément du bailleur (21 janv. 1957, Gaz. Pal. n° 57, 1, 376).

On the other hand, there is no indication of the Lessor being a party to the sublease. It is unlikely to have additional rights and liabilities beyond the basic lease contract
Selected response from:

a05
Grading comment
I'm not sure this puts the matter beyond all doubt - in fact the case you refer to seems to indicate the wording has given rise to disputes over the precise meaning - but I agree with your sentiment that they are not a full-blown party.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
4shall be required to execute
AllegroTrans
4to be bound by the contractAnthony Lines
4to be a party to the contractColin Morley
3deed...subject to the Lessor's consent...
a05
3to be called as a party to the deed
B D Finch
2to be responsible for, liable forSusan Gastaldi
Summary of reference entries provided
Ellipsis of 'à concourir'? Being party to?Alain Pommet
For posterity
Peter Shortall

  

Answers


32 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 2/5Answerer confidence 2/5
to be responsible for, liable for


Explanation:
for which the Lessor is responsible

I am not sure of this and await peer confirmation!

Susan Gastaldi
Local time: 20:58
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 11
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
to be a party to the contract


Explanation:
In this context I cannot see but that the lessor would HAVE to be a party to any transfer of lease (as it is presumably the lessor's property), so I think that I would translate as you first thought.

Colin Morley
France
Local time: 20:58
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 28
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
to be bound by the contract


Explanation:
To be "called to" = to be bound by / subject to the terms of etc.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2008-11-27 11:02:46 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

"To be bound by" also infers, or so your lawyer would tell you, "to be protected by". If a contract is fair it protects both parties, each from the other.

Anthony Lines
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:58
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 16
Notes to answerer
Asker: I think the point of the clause is to protect the Lessor's interests rather than to tie them into something unwelcome, though. Does this affect your answer?

Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
to be called as a party to the deed


Explanation:
This is on the basis of what seems to make sense, so a legal eagle may well improve on it. The Lessor has to be made aware of any transfer as it directly affects him/her. However, he can't necessarily block such a transfer.

"analogy would be a full repairing and insuring lease of heritable property. ...... either called as a party to the action or is given intimation of it. ..."
www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations/justice/CivOb.pdf

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2008-11-27 10:54:03 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Or contract


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2008-11-27 11:00:55 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

The above ref, incidentally, is about a somewhat different situation and I only included it to show that the form of words had some pedigree. On the other hand, the ref below shows that another translator has in the past used this phrase for the same context as yours.

"The lessor shall be **called upon to be a party to** the document, as specified in Article L. 145-31. On expiration of the primary lease, the owner shall be ..."
www.legifrance.gouv.fr/html/codes_traduits/commercetextA.ht...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2008-11-27 11:05:15 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I believe that it is more than an intimation and that the Lessor can countersign the document, but doesn't have to. One has to ask why this term was used rather than the more usual terms for the giving of notice. However, I don't claim to be a legal eagle (more of a buzzard).

B D Finch
France
Local time: 20:58
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 235
1 corroborated select project
in this pair and field What is ProZ.com Project History(SM)?
Notes to answerer
Asker: Heh. Your quote points out the difficulty: is it "called as a party" or just "given intimation"? Or necessarily the second with the option for the lessor of becoming the first?

Asker: I note (but then again, in Mali...) "Le témoin instrumentaire est appelé à l’acte pour satisfaire au vœu de la loi" in a document about swearing in notaires. In this case they would be there but not a party. http://www.justicemali.org/pdf/60-notaires.pdf

Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

4 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
shall be required to execute


Explanation:
I see this as the lessor/landlord being required to execute a deed if he wishes to transfer the lease to another party, in which case he is obliged to serve a copy of the deed on his tenant.
I assume there is an accent missing and this should be: être appélé à l'acte

AllegroTrans
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:58
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 182
1 corroborated select project
in this pair and field What is ProZ.com Project History(SM)?
Notes to answerer
Asker: You're right about the accent :o But the issue is not (solely) one of transfer but also of subletting, in which case the deed is surely first and foremost between the lessee and the subtenant and executed by the lessee?

Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 day1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
acte ... auquel le Bailleur sera appelé ['à concourir'] ...
deed...subject to the Lessor's consent...


Explanation:
It appears from comments below (see link) that the French law requires the Lessor's consent. In the case in question different courts had different opinions on whether a tacit approval (by implicative actions/omissions) is sufficient or it needs to be explicit but there is no doubt among them that the Lessor's agreement is required.


L'article L. 145-31 du Code de commerce, après avoir rappelé le principe de l'interdiction de la sous-location, dispose que : « En cas de sous-location autorisée, le bailleur est appelé à concourir à l'acte ».

Il en résulte que lorsque la sous-location est formellement autorisée par le bail, le propriétaire doit être appelé à concourir à l'acte de sous-location.

S'agissant d'une formalité substantielle, la simple connaissance par le bailleur du sous-locataire ne saurait valoir agrément tacite.

En effet, l'autorisation de principe d'une sous-location et la simple connaissance de la sous-location par le bailleur ne peuvent être assimilées au concours à l'acte, pas plus qu'elles ne sauraient valoir agrément du bailleur (21 janv. 1957, Gaz. Pal. n° 57, 1, 376).

On the other hand, there is no indication of the Lessor being a party to the sublease. It is unlikely to have additional rights and liabilities beyond the basic lease contract



    Reference: http://www.lextenso.com/lextenso/site/chronique_file_copyrig...
a05
Native speaker of: Native in RussianRussian
PRO pts in category: 8
Grading comment
I'm not sure this puts the matter beyond all doubt - in fact the case you refer to seems to indicate the wording has given rise to disputes over the precise meaning - but I agree with your sentiment that they are not a full-blown party.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Reference comments


3 hrs
Reference: Ellipsis of 'à concourir'? Being party to?

Reference information:
I'm not sure of the legal niceties but I think it means, as has been suggested, that the landlord should be party to the transfer in the sense that he has to give his consent. Is there a difference between being party to and being a party to? Does using the 'a' make a difference?


par acte authentique auquel le bailleur sera appelé à concourir par une sommation par acte extrajudiciaire
http://membres.lycos.fr/haltaf/bail.html

Le fonds de commerce est un ensemble de bien mobiliers affecté à l'exploitation d'une entreprise commerciale. Cette notion ne réunit pas la totalité des biens de l'entreprise. Se repose ici la question de sa nature juridique ainsi que des conditions de sa cession.
Le 14 décembre 1981, les époux Jean Pierre Blondeau ont cédé aux époux Maurice Blondeau un fonds de commerce de vente de produits pétrolier et ont leur ont loué un terrain sur lequel le fonds était en partie exploité. L'acte comportait une clause prévoyant que « le preneur ne pourra céder son droit au bail ou sous louer sans le consentement exprès et par écrit du bailleur sauf à un successeur dans son commerce de produit pétrolier, toute cession ou sous location devra avoir lieu par acte notarié auquel le bailleur sera appelé ».
Le 28 octobre 1987, les époux Maurice Blondeau ont vendu leur fonds à la société des établissements Eon Combustibles. Les époux Jean Pierre Blondeau n'ayant pas été appelés à cet acte ont assigné, le 21 juillet 1988 les époux Maurice Blondeau et la société en résiliation du bail. Ces derniers ont finalement procédé le 28 novembre 1988 à la cession du bail en présence des époux Jean Pierre Blondeau.
http://www.oboulo.com/cour-cassation-chambre-commerciale-26-...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs (2008-11-27 13:16:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Hi David, I don't really get your point about "dispute" but I think it seems to mean more than just taking note of the fact that the transfer is going ahead. Why would they need to be present unless it was to give their agreement to the contract?

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 hrs (2008-11-27 13:39:58 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I see what you mean now. Yes, does that mean that although they are "called" upon - if they don't respond then maybe it's taken to mean that they have no objection? Unfortunately I have no idea where this stands in French law.

Alain Pommet
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 28
Note to reference poster
Asker: Hi Alain and thanks for the interesting reference. The Lessor is obviously involved, but here as a party to the *dispute*, not (necessarily) as a party to the *contract*. ISTM the contract could be between the lessee and their subtenant with the lessor as an "intervenant" doing nothing more than taking due note of the contract. But I don't know.

Asker: Sorry, not being very clear here. Disregard my nonsense about the dispute. I think you (and others) are right that the Lessor is in all probability a 'full-blown' party to the subletting contract, but I'm thinking that the Lessor could conceivably be less implicated, simply 'intervening' to duly note the agreement and/or supply their permission, but that this would not necessarily make them a full-blown 'party' listed at the top of the deed and with attendant rights and responsibilities other than those set out in the initial lease contract. I know that "intervenants" of this nature exist in such deeds because I have been one, but not whether this would be the appropriate status for the Lessor in such circumstances. I'm also wondering whether the right to be "appelé à concourir" necessarily obligates one to do so; is the *obligation* one of participation or of notification only? Hope that makes more sense!

Asker: OK, well at least we are now united in our doubt and ignorance!

Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

2754 days
Reference: For posterity

Reference information:
I think Alain may well have been right about "concourir" being omitted, I had to translate a similar sentence in a commercial lease today. According to the link below, which explains the process in some detail, the Lessor merely witnesses the deed and is not a party to it.

Lorsque la sous location est encadrée dans le bail commercial, le locataire doit demander l'accord du bailleur pour sous louer une partie des locaux. Il doit l'inviter à concourir à l'acte de sous location. Dans ce cas le bailleur n'est pas partie à l'acte, il est juste « Témoin » du contrat passé.
http://www.documentissime.fr/modeles-de-lettres/lettre-de-de...

Peter Shortall
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 4
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


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:



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