09:20 Nov 27, 2008 |
French to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Real Estate | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: a05 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 | to be a party to the contract |
| ||
4 | to be bound by the contract |
| ||
4 | shall be required to execute |
| ||
3 | to be called as a party to the deed |
| ||
3 | deed...subject to the Lessor's consent... |
| ||
2 | to be responsible for, liable for |
|
Summary of reference entries provided | |||
---|---|---|---|
Ellipsis of 'à concourir'? Being party to? |
| ||
For posterity |
|
to be responsible for, liable for Explanation: for which the Lessor is responsible I am not sure of this and await peer confirmation! |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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. |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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). |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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 |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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... |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
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. |
| ||
Note to reference poster
| |||
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... |
| |
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.