This question was closed without grading. Reason: Other
May 24, 2022 16:37
2 yrs ago
12 viewers *
Italian term
Italy
British IT>EN translator living in Italy
Native in: English (Variants: British, UK) 
Works in: Italian to English
ritenere ingrata
Italian to English
Law/Patents
Law (general)
L’unico mezzo di prova idoneo a ritenere ingrata la violazione dei principi deontologici della professione, come previsti dai modelli organizzativi ex D. Lgs. 231/2001, è individuato nella condanna non definitiva con espressa esclusione delle risultanze antecedenti alla stessa, ivi compreso addirittura il rinvio a giudizio e ciò in coerenza con il principio di presunzione di innocenza di cui all’art. 27 della Costituzione, ribadito e confermato anche dall’art. 6.2 della CEDU, secondo cui "l’imputato non è considerato colpevole sino alla condanna definitiva".
Proposed translations
(English)
| 4 | deemed unjustified |
Cillie Swart
|
Proposed translations
21 hrs
Cillie Swart
South Africa
South Africa
Native in English
Specializes in field
South Africa
Finance, Legal, Business Texts
Native in: English 
Works in: German to English, Dutch to English, Afrikaans to English, and 1 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
20
deemed unjustified
its about proof that the violation should be deemed unjustified.
The only suitable means of proof to deem the violation of the deontological principles of the profession, as set out in the organisational models pursuant to Legislative Decree 231/2001, as unjustified, is identified in the non-final conviction with the express exclusion of the findings prior to the same, including even the committal for trial and this is consistent with the principle of the presumption of innocence set out in Article 27 of the Constitution, reaffirmed and confirmed also by Article 6.2 of the ECHR, according to which "the defendant is not considered guilty until the final conviction".
The only suitable means of proof to deem the violation of the deontological principles of the profession, as set out in the organisational models pursuant to Legislative Decree 231/2001, as unjustified, is identified in the non-final conviction with the express exclusion of the findings prior to the same, including even the committal for trial and this is consistent with the principle of the presumption of innocence set out in Article 27 of the Constitution, reaffirmed and confirmed also by Article 6.2 of the ECHR, according to which "the defendant is not considered guilty until the final conviction".
Discussion