ninguna indefensión

English translation: it cannot have breached / violated (the appellant insurer's) right of defence

GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
Spanish term or phrase:ninguna indefensión
English translation:it cannot have breached / violated (the appellant insurer's) right of defence
Entered by: Charles Davis

10:40 May 18, 2018
Spanish to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law (general)
Spanish term or phrase: ninguna indefensión
Appears in a report from a audiencia provincial as a court of appeal. The appellant is appealing on the grounds of court procedure that the plaintiff did not provide 'acreditacion' that he was the father of the child in his original 'pleito' This is against procure of the lley de enjuiciamento civil' and is 'indefension'
The 'fallo' states which refuses the appeal that:

habida cuenta que **ninguna indefensión ** pudo causar a la aseguradora recurrente al corresponder su introducción a la negación de la legitimación activa en la contestación a la demanda.

My attempted translation may be of assistance but of course I am unceratin of it.

...taking into account that no lack of a defence could cause the insurance company appellant to relate its introduction to the refusal to admit the complaint in the arguments in the case.
Andrew Sharp
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:07
it cannot have breached / violated (the appellant insurer's) right of defence
Explanation:
"Indefensión" means that as a result of a procedural impropriety the defendant/respondent is unable to defend itself:

"2. f. Der. Situación en que se coloca a quien se impide o se limita indebidamente la defensa de su derecho en un procedimiento administrativo o judicial."
http://dle.rae.es/?id=LMKMHpN

"La indefensión es un concepto procesal referido a la actuación de los tribunales cuando ante los mismos se quiebra el derecho fundamental a la defensa."
http://guiasjuridicas.wolterskluwer.es/Content/Documento.asp...

So it doesn't mean helplessness or defenceless and it doesn't mean lack of a proper defence (translations which can be found); the defendant could have had a proper defence but was denied the right to present it. That's what is alleged here. As article 48.2 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights says:

"2. Respect for the rights of the defence of anyone who has been charged shall be guaranteed."
http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/48-presumption-...

Personally I think that's the right way to put it: indefensión means breach/violation/denial of the right of defence.

The appellant, an insurance company, has said that the complainant's failure to identify himself properly breached its right of defence. The court is saying that it couldn't have done so, because the proper place to introduce its defence ("al corresponder su introducción") was in the denial of the complainant's legal standing ("negación de la legitimación activa") in its answer to the complaint ("en la contestación a la demanda)."

In other words, the appellant says it was denied the opportunity to challenge the complainant's lack of proper self-identification. Not so, says the court, that couldn't have happened, because it had the opportunity to do so: it should have denied the complainant's legal standing in its answer to the complaint. If it failed to do so, tough.

Or words to that effect. At least that's how I understand it. Not easy, though.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2018-05-18 12:49:03 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Just to be clear, what I'm saying is that "ninguna indefensión" is the object, not the subject, of "pudo causar": it means "no pudo causar ninguna indefensión a la aseguradora recurrente". The subject of "(no) pudo causar" is the complainant's failure to identify himself propertly.
Selected response from:

Charles Davis
Spain
Local time: 02:07
Grading comment
Sorry for delay in awarding points. I used this answer. Thank you very much
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
4 +3it cannot have breached / violated (the appellant insurer's) right of defence
Charles Davis


  

Answers


2 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +3
it cannot have breached / violated (the appellant insurer's) right of defence


Explanation:
"Indefensión" means that as a result of a procedural impropriety the defendant/respondent is unable to defend itself:

"2. f. Der. Situación en que se coloca a quien se impide o se limita indebidamente la defensa de su derecho en un procedimiento administrativo o judicial."
http://dle.rae.es/?id=LMKMHpN

"La indefensión es un concepto procesal referido a la actuación de los tribunales cuando ante los mismos se quiebra el derecho fundamental a la defensa."
http://guiasjuridicas.wolterskluwer.es/Content/Documento.asp...

So it doesn't mean helplessness or defenceless and it doesn't mean lack of a proper defence (translations which can be found); the defendant could have had a proper defence but was denied the right to present it. That's what is alleged here. As article 48.2 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights says:

"2. Respect for the rights of the defence of anyone who has been charged shall be guaranteed."
http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/48-presumption-...

Personally I think that's the right way to put it: indefensión means breach/violation/denial of the right of defence.

The appellant, an insurance company, has said that the complainant's failure to identify himself properly breached its right of defence. The court is saying that it couldn't have done so, because the proper place to introduce its defence ("al corresponder su introducción") was in the denial of the complainant's legal standing ("negación de la legitimación activa") in its answer to the complaint ("en la contestación a la demanda)."

In other words, the appellant says it was denied the opportunity to challenge the complainant's lack of proper self-identification. Not so, says the court, that couldn't have happened, because it had the opportunity to do so: it should have denied the complainant's legal standing in its answer to the complaint. If it failed to do so, tough.

Or words to that effect. At least that's how I understand it. Not easy, though.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2018-05-18 12:49:03 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Just to be clear, what I'm saying is that "ninguna indefensión" is the object, not the subject, of "pudo causar": it means "no pudo causar ninguna indefensión a la aseguradora recurrente". The subject of "(no) pudo causar" is the complainant's failure to identify himself propertly.

Charles Davis
Spain
Local time: 02:07
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 1307
Grading comment
Sorry for delay in awarding points. I used this answer. Thank you very much

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Robert Carter: Yes, very well explained. It's all the "al" and "a la"s that make it incomprehensible at first glance. My understanding is that "the appellant's right of defense cannot have been violated" (i.e., "no pudo causarSE indefensión a la..).
1 hr
  -> Thanks, Robert. Maybe so; there could be a missing "se".

agree  Sandro Tomasi: What's happenin', my Brotha from anotha Mutha?
10 hrs
  -> Not much, my man :-)

agree  AllegroTrans: well unscrambled
3 days 3 hrs
  -> Thanks!
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