Author: rebeccajowers

Latin in Legal Spanish: Principios del Derecho penal

rebeccajowers Latinismos

The announcement that Latin is to be introduced as a new subject in English state schools got me thinking that you really don’t need to know Latin to understand Spanish criminal law, but it helps! Spanish criminal law textbooks generally commence with an explanation of the underlying principles of the discipline, many of which are rooted in Latin. In the event this may be of interest to followers of this blog, here is a brief overview of some of the basic principios del Derecho penal:

Principio de lex scripta, praevia et certa—principle that criminal laws must be written, clear and non-retroactive:

  • lex scripta expresses the idea that criminal norms must be written (i.e., enacted in a statute or code)
  • lex praevia prohibits retroactive or ex post facto criminal laws, embodying two principles (nullum crimen sine praevia lege; nulla poena sine praevia lege) that provide that only those who commit an act defined as an offense in a previously-enacted law can be convicted or punished, and
  • lex certa underscores that criminal laws must be clear and unambiguous, being akin to the common law “void-for-vagueness doctrine” providing that a criminal statute that does not clearly specify what is allowed or prohibited is unconstitutional and a violation of due process.

Principio de nulla poena sine legale iudicio—principle that there can be no punishment without a legal (fair) trial with all due process guarantees

Principio de nulla poena sine culpa—principle that no one may be punished for a wrongful act if not culpable, nor inflicted with a punishment that exceeds the extent of his culpability

Principio pro actione—principle that the courts should facilitate access to justice

There are of course other criminal law principles that are not expressed in Latin (principio de la proporcionalidad de la pena; principio de la humanidad de las penas, etc.), as well as those concerning criminal trials and due process (el proceso penal y las garantías procesales), which I can perhaps address in a future blog post.

Ellipsis in Legal Spanish: la absolutoria; la condenatoria

rebeccajowers Ellipsis in Legal Language

Among the ellipses that constantly appear in legal Spanish documents, in procedural law contexts the expressions la absolutoria and la condenatoria obviously refer to sentencias (“judgments”): la sentencia absolutoria; la sentencia condenatoria.

But (¡ojo!) the correct English rendering will depend on whether the text to be translated concerns civil or criminal procedure. In civil proceedings la absolutoria refers to a “judgment for the defendant,” while la condenatoria denotes a “judgment for the plaintiff (or) claimant.” In contrast, in the context of criminal proceedings la absolutoria denotes a “judgment of not guilty” or an “acquittal,” while la condenatoria is a “judgment of guilty” or a “conviction.” Thus,

  • sentencia absolutoria =
    • judgment for the defendant (in civil proceedings)
    • acquittal (of the defendant in criminal proceedings)
  • sentencia condenatoria =
    • judgment for the plaintiff/claimant (in civil proceedings)
    • conviction (of the defendant in criminal proceedings)

False Friends in ES-EN-ES Translation: violación vs. violation

rebeccajowers False Friends

“Violation” is a common Legal English term denoting the contravention of a right, principle or prohibition, and in this context it can often be rendered literally as violación: “violation of human rights” (violación de los derechos humanos); “violation of international law” (violación del Derecho internacional) or “violation of the proportionality principle” (violación del principio de proporcionalidad).

But, violación cannot always be appropriately translated as “violation,” particularly in criminal law contexts. In that regard, delito de violación is “rape,” while violación de las condiciones de la libertad bajo fianza is commonly known as “bail-jumping,” “bail-skipping” or “jumping/skipping bail.” The generic term violación de secretos denotes “breach of confidentiality” or “disclosure of confidential (or) privileged information,” in contrast to violación de secretos industriales and violación de secretos empresariales that refer more specifically to “disclosure of trade secrets.” When referring to patents or trademarks, violación de patente/marca is best rendered as “patent/trademark infringement.” And violación de domicilio may be translated as “trespass to dwelling.” As a final example, violación de sepulturas is most often referred to in English as “profanation of tombs.”

What is beneficio de inventario?

rebeccajowers Expressing Civil Law Concepts in Common Law Terms

One of the often-confused concepts in the Spanish law of succession is beneficio de inventario, an expression that has sometimes been translated literally as “benefit of inventory” or “inventory benefit,” renderings that do not clarify its true meaning. An initial key to understanding the term is to note that under Spanish inheritance law heirs (herederos) inherit a título universal, i.e., they do not only receive assets from the decedent’s estate (as does a legatee–legatario), but they also assume all of the deceased’s liabilities.

In that regard, an heir can decide to accept an inheritance unconditionally (aceptación pura y simple), or to accept it a beneficio de inventario. The difference is quite significant. Upon an unconditional acceptance of an inheritance, the heir inherits both the decedent’s assets and liabilities, while his own personal estate immediately becomes commingled with the inherited estate. Thus, if the assets of the inherited estate do not suffice to pay the inherited estate’s debts, an heir who accepts an inheritance unconditionally must use his own assets to satisfy those debts.

In contrast, if the inheritance is accepted a beneficio de inventario, an inventory of the decedent’s assets will be conducted and the heir will have the right to limit his liability to the deceased’s creditors to the amount received in inheritance (facultad del heredero de limitar su responsabilidad ante los acreedores del difunto al montante de la herencia recibida). An inventory is conducted after notifying the creditors and legatees who may be present if they deem it to their advantage (formación del inventario con citación a los acreedores y legatarios para que acudan a presenciarlo si les conviniera). And the decedent’s estate must be kept separate from the heir’s estate until the debts of the decedent’s estate have been paid (necesidad de mantener separados el patrimonio hereditario y el patrimonio del heredero hasta que se hayan satisfecho las deudas de la herencia).

Another related expression is derecho a deliberar, which in this context refers to an heir’s right to deliberate whether or not to accept an inheritance. And, while we’re looking at strange expressions, adir la herencia simply means “to accept the inheritance,” adir being defined as aceptar la herencia tácita o expresamente (DLE). The noun here is adición: adición de la herencia (acceptance of the inheritance).

Source: Carlos Lasarte. Principios de Derecho civil VII: Derecho de sucesiones. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 3ª edición, 2003, pp. 343-355.

Mistranslation: “Property Law” is not Derecho de propiedad

rebeccajowers Mistranslations?

Although this mistranslation appears in several Internet sources, these two expressions are definitely not equivalent. We’ll look at this in more detail below, but the first step is to note that “property law” is a broad area of law that generally corresponds in Spanish to what is referred to as Derecho de cosas (property law) or derechos reales (rights in property). In contrast, propiedad, also known as dominio (ownership) is only one aspect of this likewise broad area of derechos reales.

To illustrate this, it’s helpful to compare the partial content of a typical US property law course syllabus with part of a Spanish Manual de Derecho Civil that deals with Derecho de cosas or derechos reales:

Property Law Course Syllabus:Manual de Derecho de cosas (or) derechos reales:
–The Nature of Property
–Acquisition of Property
–Adverse Possession
–Acquisition by Gift
–Estates in Land: fee simple, life estates, defeasible estates and future interests
—Concurrent Ownership
–Landlord-Tenant Relationships
–Real Estate Contracts; Deeds
–Land Registration
–Mortgages
–Easements
–Eminent domain
–Personal Property and Bailments
–(etc.; etc.)		–Adquisición de los derechos reales (ocupación; accesión; usucapión)
–Posesión
—Propiedad; copropiedad
–Usufructo
–Derecho de uso
–Derecho de habitación
–Derecho de superficie
–Servidumbres
–Derechos reales de garantía (prenda; hipoteca
–Derechos de adquisición preferente (tanteo; retracto)
–Derecho registral inmobiliario
–(etc.; etc.)

As shown above, ownership (propiedad) is only one of many aspects of “property law” covered in the US syllabus in the section concerning “fee simple*” (absolute ownership, similar to dominio pleno in Spanish law), along with the section on “concurrent ownership” (copropiedad).

As likewise shown above in the Spanish example, propiedad (ownership) is only one of the many rights in property (derechos reales), and is addressed in Spanish civil law textbooks under propiedad and copropiedad.

Thus, Property Law cannot be translated as Derecho de propiedad. But the specific subjective right of derecho de propiedad (with a lowercase “d”) is, among many others, one of the principal rights (ownership) that one may have in property (cosas; bienes). In that regard, propiedad is defined in the Spanish Civil Code as el derecho de gozar y disponer de una cosa, sin más limitaciones que las establecidas en las leyes (art. 348 CC).

(Recap: property law = Derecho de cosas; Régimen jurídico de los derechos reales).

In case they may be of interest, here are links to other blog entries dealing with several aspects of derechos reales and property law:

*Fee simple—the greatest possible estate in land, wherein the owner has the right to use it, exclusively possess it, commit waste upon it, dispose of it by deed or will, and take its fruits. A fee simple represents absolute ownership of land… (West’s Encyclopedia of American Law)

Legal English: confusing terms (advice; advise; advisement)

rebeccajowers Legal English for Spanish-speakers

These look-alike terms are sometimes confused, even by native English speakers. The first two are not necessarily legal terms, but do often appear in legal contexts. “Advice” (consejo) is always a noun: “He gave me some good advice.” “United States Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.” In contrast, “advise” is a verb meaning “to counsel;” “to give advice” (aconsejar): “The defendant was advised by his attorney not to testify during the trial.” As a verb “advise” can also mean “to inform” (avisar): “Please advise me when you are ready.”

In other respects, “advisement” denotes “careful consideration,” and judges often indicate that they will “take a matter under advisement” when they postpone making a decision until a later date. Thus, the expression “I will take this matter under advisement” implies that the matter in question will be given careful consideration and that a decision will be forthcoming.

Legal False Friends: practicar vs. “practice”

rebeccajowers False Friends

In legal contexts, practicar cannot always be translated literally as “to practice.” In procedural law, for example, practicar la prueba refers to “examining evidence,” while practicar la prueba testifical is specifically the “examining (or) questioning of witnesses” or “taking witness testimony.” Likewise, practicar la notificación de la demanda is one of the ways to express “service of process.”

In tax law, practicar retenciones denotes an employer’s “withholding taxes” from an employee’s paycheck, while practicar reducciones en la declaración del IRPF means “to take deductions on a personal income tax return.” With regard to public registers, practicar la inscripción registral refers to “recording,” “entering” (or) “making an entry” on a register. And the expression practicar un aborto denotes “performing an abortion.”

Similarly, “practice” cannot always be translated as practicar. A common example is to “practice law,” which in Spanish is ejercer la abogacía. In this context the expression “attorney-at-law” denotes an abogado en ejercicio, one who has a “law practice.” And a lawyer who is in business for himself (abogado con despacho propio) is often said to have a “solo practice” and is known as a “solo practitioner.”

(Capsule Vocabularies) Extradition: Spanish-English Terminology and Concepts

rebeccajowers Capsule vocabularies

As is often the case, while searching for something else I ran across an insightful article on extradition from ThoughtCo. Since this is a topic I’ve researched in the past, I’m offering below some of the essential Spanish terms and concepts concerning extradition (in general, and between EU countries) with possible English translations.

  • tratado de extradición–extradition treaty
  • Convenio relativo a la extradición entre los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea–Convention relating to Extradition between the Member States of the European Union
  • petición de extradición–extradition request
  • Decisión marco relativa a la orden de detención europea—Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant
  • orden europea de detención y entrega (“euroorden”)—European arrest warrant (EAW)
  • sujeto/personas extraditables–extraditable persons
  • sujetos extraditados; personas extraditadas–extradited persons
  • estado requirente–requesting state
  • estado requerido–requested/extraditing/surrendering state
  • extradición activa–request for extradition; import extradition (E&W); seeking the extradition of an alleged offender from another jurisdiction
  • extradición pasiva–receipt of an extradition request; export extradition (E&W); extradition of an alleged offender to another jurisdiction
  • extradición en tránsito–transit extradition
  • extradición legal–extradition governed by domestic law
  • extradición convencional–extradition governed by international treaty
  • reextradición–reextradition
  • principio de legalidad–legality principle (requirement that there be a treaty or law that allows extradition)
  • principio de reciprocidad–reciprocity principle
  • principio de la doble incriminación–dual criminality principle; rule of dual criminality (principle that allows a state to refuse to extradite if the alleged crime on which extradition is based does not constitute an offense in both the requesting and extraditing states)
  • principio de especialidad–speciality principle; rule of speciality (principle that a person who has been extradited may only be prosecuted for the offense alleged in the extradition request)
  • principio de la no entrega por delitos de carácter político y militar–principle of refusing to extradite for political or military offenses
  • principio de la no entrega por delitos no perseguibles de oficio–principle of refusing to extradite for private crimes for which there is no mandatory prosecution in the extraditing state
  • principio de la no entrega por delitos leves–principle of refusing to extradite for misdemeanors
  • principio de non/ne bis in idem–rule against double jeopardy
  • principio de no entrega de los nacionales–principle of refusing to extradite one’s own citizens for trial in a foreign country

Impossible-to-Translate Criminal Law Terms: tipicidad; antijuricidad; culpabilidad; punibilidad

rebeccajowers Español jurídico

tipicidad; antijuricidad; culpabilidad; punibilidad

These criminal theory terms often appear to elude translation since they are not familiar concepts in Anglo-American law. Briefly, the Spanish system for determining criminal liability follows the tripartite German model and is accomplished in three successive steps. First the tipicidad of the act is established, i.e., a determination is made as to whether the alleged offender has fulfilled each element of the statutory definition of that specific offense (tipo penal). Among others, these include both the criminal act or actus reus element (tipo objetivo) and the mental or mens rea element (tipo subjetivo). The wrongfulness (antijuricidad) of the act is then assessed to determine whether the alleged offender’s act was wrongful (antijurídico, sometimes also translated as “unlawful”) and whether there are justification defenses (causas de justificación) that would render the act lawful. In a third step culpability or blameworthiness (culpabilidad) is examined to determine the alleged offender’s individual accountability for the offense and whether there are excuse defenses (causas de exculpación) which would exempt him from criminal liability. In Spain, a fourth element punibilidad (literally, “punishability”) is assessed to address individual cases in which certain offenders may be exempt from punishment.

It is often difficult to find suitable English translations for these four criminal law concepts, and I’ve found it helpful to turn to scholars who write about Spanish and German criminal law theory in English to see the terms they use. Here is a basic bibliography:

Bachmaier Winter, Lorena and Antonio del Moral García. Criminal Law in Spain. Alphen ann den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2010.

Bohlander, Michael. “Basic Concepts of German Criminal Procedure, An Introduction.” Durham Law Review Online, Vol. 1, 2011, pp. 1-26.

Bohlander, Michael. English translation of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch). Saarbrücken: juris GmbH, 2010.

Bohlander, Michael. Principles of German Criminal Law. Portland: Hart Publishing, 2009.

Dubber, Markus Dirk. “Theories of Crime and Punishment in German Criminal Law.” The American Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 53, No. 3 (2005), pp. 679-707.

Dubber, Markus Dirk. “The Promise of German Criminal Law: A Science of Crime and Punishment” German Law Review, Vol. 6, No. 7 (2005), pp. 1049-1071.

Fletcher, George P. Basic Concepts of Criminal Law. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Fletcher, George P. y Steve Sheppard. American Law in a Global Context: the Basics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Gómez Jara, Carlos and Luis E. Chiesa. “Spanish Criminal Law” in Kevin Jon Heller and Markus D. Dubber, eds. The Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2009, pp. 488-530.

Hermida, Julián. “Convergence of Civil Law and Common Law in the Criminal Theory Realm.” University of Miami International & Comparative Law Review, Vol. 13 (2005-2006) pp. 163-232.

Naucke, Wolfgang. “An Insider’s Perspective on the Significance of the German Criminal Law Theory’s System for Analyzing Criminal Acts.” Brigham Young University Law Review (1984), pp. 305-321.

Naucke, Wolfgang. “Interpretation and Analogy in Criminal Law.” Brigham Young University Law Review, Vol. 3 (1986), pp. 535-551.

Weigend, Thomas. “Germany” in Kevin Jon Heller and Markus D. Dubber, eds. Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2011, pp. 252-287.

Don’t confuse orden de entrada y registro with orden de registro de entrada

rebeccajowers Confusing Terms

orden de entrada y registro; orden de registro de entrada

These expressions are admittedly confusingly similar, but couldn’t be more different in meaning. Orden de entrada y registro (often shortened to orden de registro) is a criminal law term, being the Spanish equivalent of a “search warrant” ordered by a judge incident to a criminal investigation. Although orden de registro is a commonly used expression, in Spain a search warrant must be issued in the form of an auto, and thus is more properly called an auto de entrada y registro.

In contrast orden de registro de entrada denotes the order in which an application or other document has been filed for entry on an public register and is often important for establishing prior rights in many legal transactions. The “first to file” system is characteristic of many official registers governed by the prior in tempore, potior in jure principle. This idea of “earlier in time, stronger in right” implies that earlier applicants (the first to file their applications) will have superior (prior) rights with respect to those who do so later. For example, in the context of registering a trademark, the first application received (and subsequently granted registration) at the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office (Oficina Española de Patentes y Marcas) will have exclusive rights to use that mark.

Intellectual property and other rights can be based on the “first to use” principle or the “first to file” principle.” In “first to file” systems such as in Spain and most civil law countries, regardless of prior use the first person to file an application and to be granted registration will be considered as the legal owner to the exclusion of all others. Thus the order in which applications are received at public registries or in other governmental agencies is often of paramount importance. Registro de entrada denotes a daily register of applications filed, and orden de registro de entrada is the order in which a given application was received, generally based on a date, time and an application number. Thus the expression riguroso orden de registro de entrada de las solicitudes is often used to indicate that applications will be considered “strictly in the order in which they were filed.”