JURTRANS
  • HOME /
  • ABOUT /
  • VALUES /
  • Services /
  • RESOURCES /
  • BLOG /
  • CONTACT /
  • EN /
  • GR

Our Blog

SUBJECT TO…IN LEGAL TRANSLATION

By John O 'Shea on May 7, 2016 in English legal language and terminology, Legal linguistics, Legal terminology, Legal Translation
Share this post

THE TERMS “SUBJECT TO”, “NOTWITHSTANDING” OR “WITHOUT PREJUDICE”: WHICH ONE SHOULD YOU CHOOSE?

I was recently reading this interesting article by Andrew Nickels about the clauses “subject to”, “notwithstanding” and “without prejudice” and it got me thinking how useful the clarification of these terms would be for the purposes of legal translation.

Every legal translator has encountered one or all of these terms in a contract or some other legal document they had to translate, either to or from English. These shorthand expressions prove to be useful tools in saving time when it comes to drafting a contract and that’s why lawyers and legal practitioners use them often.

What do they really mean though in plain English? Are they always used correctly? Given the difference these terms can make when included in or left out of a contract, their meaning must be crystal clear to the parties, their lawyers and, of course, to the potential translators of the contract.

Subject to: The phrase “subject to” is used when an exception from a rule or provision contained in a different clause of the contract needs to be introduced.

  • Clause 1 states that “Subject to clause 2, the buyer does not have the right to withdraw from the sale, if 15 days have passed after the signing of the contract”. Clause 2 provides that “The buyer has the right to withdraw from the sale whenever he discovers that a characteristic of the object of the sale is missing, which the parties have agreed as being essential”.
  • Clause 1 states that “Subject to clause 2, the carrier is liable for any damage of the goods from the moment of receiving the shipment, until the shipment is promptly delivered to the recipient”. Clause 2 provides that “The carrier is not liable for any damage of the goods while they are being transferred to the recipient, if the damage was the direct result of force majeure”.

In the above examples clause 2 takes priority over clause 1 by introducing an exception of the rule contained in clause 1.

Another way to express the same thing in plain English would be to say “Except as set out in clause 2…”

Notwithstanding: “Notwithstanding” is in effect the opposite of “subject to”. Let’s re-write the above examples using “notwithstanding to”, instead of “subject to”.

  • Clause 1 states that “The buyer does not have the right to withdraw from the sale, if 15 days have passed after the signing of the contract”. Clause 2 provides that “Notwithstanding clause 1, the buyer has the right to withdraw from the sale whenever he discovers that a characteristic of the object of the sale is missing, which the parties have agreed as being essential”.
  • Clause 1 states that “The carrier is liable for any damage of the goods from the moment of receiving the shipment, until the shipment is promptly delivered to the recipient”. Clause 2 provides that “Notwithstanding clause 1, the carrier is not liable for any damage of the goods while they are being transferred to the recipient, if the damage was the direct result of force majeure”.

Notwithstanding sets out an exception from the rule contained in clause 1, when the conditions provided for in clause 2 have been met.

Another way to express the same thing in plain English would be to say “Despite clause 1…”

Sometimes the same term can be found in a contract, but formulated much more broadly. For example, when the person who drafts the contract does not have the time to mention the specific clause numbers, for which the exception is set, the expression can be found as “Notwithstanding any other provision in this agreement…”.  In this case the exception refers to the entire agreement.  This expression can be we-written in plain English as “Despite anything else to the contrary in this agreement…”.

Without prejudice to: “Without prejudice to” is used when no priority needs to be given over another clause of the contract.

  • Clause 1 states that “Without prejudice to any other rights that the buyer may have according to the applicable law, the buyer has the right to withdraw from the sale within 15 days of the signing of the contract”. The buyer therefore, other than the right to withdraw from the contract, has all the other rights conferred upon him under the applicable law.
  • Clause 1 states that “Without prejudice to any other liability of the carrier according to the applicable law, the carrier is liable for any damage of the goods from the moment of receiving the shipment, until the shipment is promptly delivered to the recipient”. The carrier therefore, other than being liable for any damage of the goods during the transfer, is also liable for all the other instances provided for under the applicable law.

Another way to express the same thing in plain English would be to say “Without affecting any other rights/liabilities according to the applicable law…”.

 

By Eva Angelopoulou

Legal discourse Legal language Legal translation
  • ← Previous
  • Next →
Comments ( 0 )

    Leave A Comment
    Cancel Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Search

    JURTRANS BLOG

    This is the home of JurTrans blog, with useful information, articles, hand-picked seminars and conferences in the area of Legal Translation.

    Subscribe

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 895 other subscribers

    CATEGORIES

    • Book Review (7)
    • books on legal translation (3)
    • Conferences (24)
    • Courses (9)
    • Court Interpreting (6)
    • Dictionaries (6)
    • English legal language and terminology (18)
    • EU law (5)
    • Greek language (6)
    • Greek legal language and terminology (18)
    • Greek penal code (2)
    • Hellenic Civil Code (3)
    • Hellenic Code of Civil Procedure (2)
    • Insurance law (1)
    • Legal dictionaries (10)
    • legal language (10)
    • Legal linguistics (21)
    • Legal terminology (39)
    • Legal Translation (100)
    • Legal Translation Quotes (16)
    • liability for translations (1)
    • professionalisation (5)
    • quality of legal translation (6)
    • quality of translation (2)
    • translation of legal documents (12)
    • Μεταφράσεις νομικών κειμένων (11)
    • Νομική μετάφραση (14)

    TAGS

    legal translation conferences Common law liability for translations translator liability translation agency liability professionalisation Technology Words to Deeds Insurance Law EU law legislative drafting translation quality corpuses ποινικός κώδικας adversarial interpreting quality of translation translation blunders international diplomacy who translates matters jurilinguistics νομική μετάφραση machine translation liability for legal translations legal translation hub International Translation Day quality of legal translation Hellenic Code of Civil Procedure Hellenic Civil Code ELETO νομικα μεταφ Greek language Seminar Court Interpreting translation of legal documents νομικές μεταφράσεις Legal discourse legal translators Terminology Legal Dictionaries Greek legal terminology Legal linguistics Conference Greek legal language Greek legal translation Legal language Legal translation

    ARCHIVES

    • February 2021 (3)
    • January 2021 (1)
    • September 2020 (1)
    • March 2020 (1)
    • January 2020 (1)
    • February 2019 (1)
    • October 2018 (2)
    • September 2018 (1)
    • May 2018 (3)
    • December 2017 (1)
    • October 2017 (2)
    • September 2017 (1)
    • August 2017 (1)
    • July 2017 (1)
    • May 2017 (1)
    • April 2017 (1)
    • March 2017 (1)
    • February 2017 (2)
    • December 2016 (2)
    • November 2016 (1)
    • October 2016 (1)
    • September 2016 (3)
    • July 2016 (3)
    • June 2016 (6)
    • May 2016 (9)
    • April 2016 (3)
    • March 2016 (5)
    • December 2015 (3)
    • November 2015 (4)
    • October 2015 (12)
    • September 2015 (3)
    • May 2015 (1)
    • March 2015 (19)
    • February 2015 (6)
    • January 2015 (1)
    • December 2014 (3)
    © Copyright 2014 JurTrans
    By using this site, you agree that we may store and access cookies on your device. Accept Read More
    Privacy & Cookies Policy

    Privacy Overview

    This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
    Necessary
    Always Enabled

    Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

    Non-necessary

    Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.