Terminology Sources: Legal Information Institute (LII)

Terminology Sources

Housed at the Cornell University Law School, the Legal Information Institute has provided open-access legal information from a variety of sources since 1992. Its “Get the Law” section includes the complete texts of the principal US legal documents. including the US Code (compendium of all permanent federal statutes), all of the Federal Rules of Procedure (civil, criminal, appellate, evidence and bankruptcy) and the Uniform Commercial Code, among others. The LII’s “Legal Encyclopedia” features hundreds of entries on business law, constitutional law, criminal law, family law, employment law, money and finances, and many other areas of law. The “Articles” section likewise has hundreds of summaries on a broad variety of legal topics. And under “Español” many of the aspects of US law are presented in Spanish. At the end of the article in Spanish there is a link to the same or similar article in English for those who may want to compare the concepts and terminology presented there in both languages.

Confusing Terms: Criminal Defamation

Confusing Terms2
Many confusing terms in legal Spanish and legal English are simply legal synonyms that are not always clearly distinguishable, often making it necessary to learn how each one is used in a specific context or in set phrases (frases hechas). Some may be interchangeable; others are limited to use in specific contexts. Those highlighted in this blog are ones that I have seen confused in translation or that my students of Legal English and lawyer clients have found most difficult to distinguish.

injurias; calumnia; slander; libel

These terms denoting different types of defamation (difamación) are easily confused. Article 208 of the Spanish Criminal Code defines injuria as acción o expresión que lesiona la dignidad de otra persona, menoscabando su fama o atentando contra su propia estimación (action or expression that injures the dignity of another, damaging his reputation or undermining his self-esteem). Injurias constitute a criminal offense when they are made with the knowledge that they are false or with reckless disregard for the truth (cuando se efectúan con conocimiento de su falsedad o con temerario desprecio hacia la verdad). In common law jurisdictions “slander” and “libel” are the two principal types of defamation, slander being spoken defamation (“a defamatory assertion expressed in a transitory form, especially speech”*), while libel is written defamation, or defamation preserved in some permanent form (“a defamatory statement expressed in a fixed medium, especially in writing”*). Thus libel is defamation expressed in writing, but also in other fixed mediums (print, pictures, signs, effigies, etc.). The two concepts may perhaps be distinguished in Spanish as injurias vertidas de palabra (slander) and injurias vertidas por escrito (libel).

Calumnia is a specific type of defamation defined in Article 205 of the Criminal Code as imputación de un delito hecha con conocimiento de su falsedad o con temerario desprecio hacia la verdad (accusing someone of a criminal offense knowing that the accusation is false or with reckless disregard for the truth). “Calumny” (a false charge or imputation*) is not often used in modern criminal codes and, thus, since the distinction between injurias and calumnia is not readily made in common law jurisdictions, calumnia may perhaps be best translated descriptively as the “false accusation of a crime” or the “wrongful accusation of a criminal offense.”

And perhaps the most important aspect of the above is to note that in Spain (and in many Spanish-speaking jurisdictions) injurias and calumnias are both criminal offenses, while in common law countries slander and libel are generally torts. Thus, when speaking of the two Spanish concepts collectively it may perhaps be more accurate to describe injurias and calumnias in English as forms of “criminal defamation.”

*Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th ed.

Legal Meanings of “bench”

Common Words with Uncommon Legal Meanings
In his 1963 work “The Language of the Law,” the eminent legal linguist David Mellinkoff observed that legal discourse often uses “common words with uncommon meanings.” Indeed, in both Spanish and English, common words and expressions often take on unexpected meanings when used in legal contexts, and there are many simple, seemingly inoffensive everyday words and expressions that can prompt translation mistakes if their special legal meanings are ignored.  In this section I include some of the presumably simple legal English expressions that my students and translation clients have found most puzzling, along with a selection of legal Spanish terms that may stump translators when initially entering the legal translation field.

bench

“Bench” has several meanings in legal contexts, both literal and figurative. In its literal sense, rather than sitting in individual seats (escaños) as do, for example, the diputados in the Congreso de los Diputados in Spain, in the UK Parliament’s House of Commons (Cámara de los Comunes) MPs (“Members of Parliament”) literally sit on benches. The first or “front row” of benches on either side of the aisle is reserved for ministers and leaders of the principal political parties. Thus the expression “front benchers” generally refers to government ministers and opposition leaders, while “back benchers” denotes MPs who often do not hold official positions in government or in their respective parties, and who literally sit on the back benches.

In other respects, in common law courts the seat of a judge has traditionally been referred to as the “bench,” (although in modern courts judges generally sit is overstuffed black leather chairs). Thus, when holding trial a judge wishing to confer with an attorney may indicate for him to “approach the bench.” In a figurative sense “the bench” often denotes all of the judges on a given court or the judiciary in general (la magistratura or la judicatura). In that regard, the expression “full bench” refers to el pleno del tribunal (or el tribunal en pleno), and “he has served on the bench for 15 years” means “ha ejercido de juez (or) magistrado durante 15 años.” “Bench trial” is a synonym of “nonjury trial” (juicio sin jurado), and the expression “bench ruling” (literally resolución dictada desde el estrado) may perhaps be used to describe what in Spanish practice is often called a sentencia in voce or sentencia de viva voz (i.e., an “oral judgment” or “judgment rendered in open court”). Likewise, in British usage a lawyer who has been appointed a judge is said to have been “raised to the bench” (nombrado juez), but literally, elevado a la judicatura).

 

Legal Meanings of “bar”

Common Words with Uncommon Legal Meanings
In his 1963 work “The Language of the Law,” the eminent legal linguist David Mellinkoff observed that legal discourse often uses “common words with uncommon meanings.” Indeed, in both Spanish and English, common words and expressions often take on unexpected meanings when used in legal contexts, and there are many simple, seemingly inoffensive everyday words and expressions that can prompt translation mistakes if their special legal meanings are ignored.  In this section I include some of the presumably simple legal English expressions that my students and translation clients have found most puzzling, along with a selection of legal Spanish terms that may stump translators when initially entering the legal translation field.

bar

In what is perhaps its principle legal meaning, “bar” denotes the legal profession or lawyers collectively and, in that regard, the expression “bar association” may be rendered as colegio de abogados. In order to be “admitted to the bar” (colegiarse), American attorneys must pass a bar exam in the state in which they intend to practice law (ejercer la abogacía). Thus in order to be a “practicing attorney” (ejerciente; abogado en ejercicio), a lawyer must first become a “member of the bar” (abogado colegiado) and, for example, in a lawyer’s resumé or CV (curriculum vitae) the expression “admitted (to the bar) in 2002” indicates that he passed the bar exam that year. By extension, a “sidebar conference” is a courtroom discussion between the judge and the opposing attorneys conducted at the judge’s bench, out of the earshot of jurors.

Similarly, in England “bar” denotes barristers collectively, and “to be called to the bar” is to be admitted to the profession by one of the Inns of Court (professional associations for barristers). The “Bar Council” is the governing body of barristers for England and Wales.

But why does the term “bar” denote lawyers and the legal profession collectively? When I ask this question in class my students (all young Spanish lawyers who have seen many a US courtroom drama in TV series such as The Good Wife, The Good Fight or Suits) often reply that when an American lawyer wins a case he and his colleagues always wind up celebrating their victory at a bar. But despite lawyers’ portrayed penchant for alcohol, the reason has historic roots. There has traditionally been (and still is) a partition such as a bar or railing in common law courtrooms separating the spectators from the proceedings. And only those participating in the trial (judge, lawyers, parties) are allowed “beyond the bar.”

In other respects, in nonlegal contexts “bar” is a synonym of “prohibition,” having the additional meaning of “legal impediment.” When a right can no longer be exercised because the term for doing so has elapsed, it is often said to be “time-barred.” Laws establishing a limitations period during which rights must be exercised are know as “statutes of limitations,” such as the Limitation Act 1980 of England and Wales. Thus, as with “time-barred,” the expression “statute-barred” indicates that by law a right can no longer be exercised. Both may be rendered in Spanish as prescrito/a. In that regard, and to provide a few examples, a “statute-barred (or) time-barred debt” is a deuda prescrita (or deuda que ha prescrito), while a “statute-barred (or) time-barred offense” is a delito prescrito (or delito que ha prescrito).  And “the appeal is statute-barred (or) time-barred” indicates that el recurso ha prescrito.

False Friends: transacción; transaction

Oh, no! False Friends
When learning legal terminology in a bilingual context one of the first pitfalls encountered are so-called “false friends,” words or expressions that appear to be cognates, but are actually unrelated in meaning. Many years ago I set about identifying the “Top 40 False Friends in Spanish-English Legal Translation.” As the list grew I had to change the title to “101 False Friends.” In my collection I now have well over that number and will be sharing some of them in this blog. To be fair, many are only partial false friends that may actually be cognates when used in one branch of law, while perhaps qualifying as false friends in another legal practice area. And in some instances the cognate may simply not be the most appropriate rendering in legal contexts.

transacción; transaction

There are many legal expressions in which transacción and “transaction” are obvious cognates, as in transacciones financieras (financial transactions); transacciones inmobiliarias (real estate transactions); transacciones comerciales (commercial transactions) or transacciones con tarjetas de crédito (credit card transactions). But in the context of civil procedure transacción has a different meaning, denoting a “settlement” reached by the parties to a dispute. In that regard, the parties may reach an out-of-court settlement (transacción extrajudicial) or may settle in court during the course of proceedings (transacción judicial). In that case, the judge will ratify (homologar) the settlement (described as homologación judicial de la transacción). This type of ruling ratifying a settlement (auto homologando la transacción) may be expressed in English as an “agreed judgment,” “consent judgment,” “stipulated judgment” or “judgment by consent.”

It should perhaps be noted that in this context transacción is the noun form of the verb transigir, defined in the Diccionario de la Lengua Española as ajustar algún punto dudoso o litigioso, conviniendo las partes voluntariamente en algún medio que componga y parta la diferencia de la disputa. Thus, transigir might be appropriately rendered in English as “to settle,” “to reach a settlement” or perhaps more generally as “to compromise.”

 

Terminology of Civil Law Systems

Derecho-civil

For ES-EN translators from common law jurisdictions, here is a short bibliography on the basic features of civil law systems and civil law-common law terminology:

Apple, James G. and Robert P. Deyling. A Primer on the Civil-Law System. Washington, D.C.: Federal Judicial Center, 1995. http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/CivilLaw.pdf/$file/CivilLaw.pdf

Glendon, Mary Ann, et. al. Comparative Legal Traditions in a Nutshell. St. Paul: West Academic Publishing, 2015.

Kinsella, Stephan. “A Civil Law to Common Law Dictionary.” Louisiana Law Review, Vol. 54, No. 5 (May 1994). as published

Kinsella, Stephan. “Civil-Law Terminology and its Relation to Common-Law Terminology” Pennsylvania Bar Association Young Lawyers’ Division Newsletter, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Spring 1995), pp. 12-14. Civil-Law Terminology and its Relation to Common-Law Terminology

Lawson, F.H. A Common Lawyer Looks at the Civil Law. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Law School, 1953; Praeger, 1977. (Available from HeinOnLine)

Lundmark, Thomas. Charting the Divide between Common and Civil Law. NY: Oxford University Press, 2012.

Malavet, Pedro A. “Seminar: An Introduction to the Civil Code.” http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~malavet/seminar/ccmain.htm

Merryman, John Henry. The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal Systems of Western Europe and Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press (3rd ed.), 2007.

Tetley, William, “Mixed Jurisdictions: Common Law vs. Civil Law (Codified and Uncodified)” Parts I and II. 4 Uniform Law Review 1999-3, 591-619 and 1999-4, 877-907. Mixed Jurisdictions: Common Law v. Civil Law – DigitalCommons …

 

Translating carga de la prueba

Legal Spanish for Translators

carga de la prueba

burden of proof; burden of persuasion; burden of production

Carga de la prueba is easily recognizable as an appropriate rendering for “burden of proof.” But carga de la prueba is also sometimes offered as a translation for “burden of persuasion,” perhaps because there isn’t really a similar Spanish law concept. Indeed, in Anglo-American law the concept of burden of proof entails two different aspects: “burden of persuasion” and “burden of production” (also called “burden of going forward with the evidence”).

This is evident in the definitions provided in Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed.):

 Burden of proof–A party’s duty to prove a disputed assertion or charge. The burden of proof includes both the burden of persuasion and the burden of production.

 Burden of persuasion–A party’s duty to convince the fact-finder to view the facts in a way that favors that party. In civil cases, the plaintiff’s burden is usually “by a preponderance of the evidence,” while in criminal cases the prosecution’s burden is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

 Burden of production–A party’s duty to introduce enough evidence on a issue to have the issue decided by the fact-finder, rather than decided against the party in a peremptory ruling such as a summary judgment or directed verdict.

 The fact that Spanish may not have terminological equivalents for both “burden of persuasion” and “burden of production” was underscored by Professor Fernando Gómez Pomar (professor at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra Law School in Barcelona) in an article published in the InDret law journal in 2001:*

 Las reglas sobre carga de la prueba comprenden, pues, de un lado, la determinación del umbral de certidumbre que requiere el juzgador para satisfacer la pretensión y, de otro, la determinación de cuál de las partes ha de suministrar las pruebas para alcanzar dicho umbral, so pena de recibir una decisión adversa sobre el fondo del asunto si no lo hace.

En el ámbito jurídico norteamericano, ambos aspectos son analizados independientemente dentro de la genérica “burden of proof”: se habla así de “burden of persuasion”, “level of confidence” o “standard of proof” … para referirse al primero, frente a “burden of production” o “burden of proof” en sentido estricto.

En España y, en general, en Europa, no se realiza con nitidez –o no se realiza en absoluto- la distinción entre las dos vertientes de la carga de la prueba. Tal vez ello se deba a que implícitamente se considera que sólo hay un nivel de confianza o convicción jurídicamente admisible en el juzgador acerca del acaecimiento de un cierto suceso.

Thus, the single expression carga de la prueba may have to suffice when rendering either “burden of proof” or “burden of persuasion” in English, unless the context requires clearly distinguishing the two by providing definitional translations. In contrast, I believe that “burden of production” (or “burden of going forward with the evidence”) does have an equivalent concept in Spanish and may be appropriately rendered as carga de aportación de la prueba.

*Fernando Gómez Pomar. Carga de la prueba y responsabilidad objetiva. InDret 1/2001, pp. 1-17. http://www.indret.com/pdf/040_es.pdf

Ellipsis in bien protegido

Ellipsis in Legal Spanish

Bien protegido might appear to refer to “protected assets (or) goods,” and the expression has sometimes been mistranslated as such, or has simply been deemed an adjective phrase and rendered as “well-protected.” But bien protegido is actually an ellipsis for bien jurídico protegido (also called bien jurídico tutelado), a criminal law term (from the German Rechtsgut) that designates the specific interest protected under the individual provisions of the Spanish Criminal Code.

As examples, in the crime of homicidio, the legally-protected interest (bien jurídico protegido) is la vida humana.* With respect to delitos de amenazas, the legally-protected interests include “el sentimiento de tranquilidad y el ataque a la libertad en la formación de la voluntad…”* In the crime of failure to come to the aid (omisión del deber de socorro) the bien jurlidico protegido is “la solidaridad humana.”* And in crimes of theft, robbery and burglary (hurto, robo con violencia en las personas y robo con fuerza en las cosas) the legally-protected interests are posesión or propiedad.*

*Source for the examples cited above: Tomás Vives Antón, et.al., Derecho Penal, Parte Especial, Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, 2015.

Ellipsis in Legal Spanish: arrendamiento para uso distinto

Ellipsis in Legal Spanish

The expression arrendamiento para uso distinto immediately prompts the question ¿distinto a qué? The complete expression with its ellipted part included is arrendamiento para uso distinto del de vivienda, and it has been translated perhaps rather clumsily as “non-dwelling lease,” “lease for other than habitation” and “lease intended for other than residential purposes.”

But as used in Spain arrendamiento para uso distinto (del de vivienda) simply denotes the “leasing of non-residential property” (literally, “leasing for use other than as a residence.”) And, in this context, uso distinto refers to “non-residential use” or “use for non-residential purposes.” Thus, a contrato de arrendamiento para uso distinto is  a “contract to lease property for non-residential purposes” that may often be translated simply as “non-residential lease.”

Ellipsis in Legal Language

Ellipsis in Legal Spanish

No one can dispute the fact that legal language is a foreign language that future lawyers must begin to master from their first day in law school. With much dedication, translators can also acquire a solid knowledge of legal terminology from law school textbooks, well-selected dictionaries and many other legal sources. But lawyers don’t always go by the book and sometimes use their own telegraphic language, often leaving out half of any given expression. This may make translation nearly impossible for the uninitiated and, in effect, the meanings of certain legal Spanish phrases containing ellipses often elude translators. Spanish lawyers and legal professionals may be quite familiar with such expressions, but they are largely absent from bilingual legal sources.

In blog entries under “Ellipsis in Legal Language” I will offer a sampling of ellipses that I have found to be the most common, together with an explanation of the ellipted parts and suggestions as to how the expressions might be rendered in English. Many would be obvious in certain contexts, but may be difficult to understand if used in isolation. And of course there may be hundreds more: that’s just the way lawyers talk.