Dec 8, 2016 15:19
7 yrs ago
10 viewers *
German term
Berechtigt
German to English
Law/Patents
Law: Contract(s)
Hi guys,
Have been asked to translate a legal text. It's generally not too bad but I'm a little out of my comfort zone. See below:
"Die Gesellschaft ist weiterhin zur Übernahme der persönlichen Haftung sowie zum Erwerb, dem Halten und der Veräußerung von Beteiligungen im In- und Ausland berechtigt."
My literal translation "The company shall also be entitled to assume personal liability .... " doesn't add up. Any suggestions from legal experts:)?
I currently have the "safer" option of "Furthermore, the company can assume personal liability and also acquire, retain and dispose of investments domestically and abroad."
Thanks,
Gavin
Have been asked to translate a legal text. It's generally not too bad but I'm a little out of my comfort zone. See below:
"Die Gesellschaft ist weiterhin zur Übernahme der persönlichen Haftung sowie zum Erwerb, dem Halten und der Veräußerung von Beteiligungen im In- und Ausland berechtigt."
My literal translation "The company shall also be entitled to assume personal liability .... " doesn't add up. Any suggestions from legal experts:)?
I currently have the "safer" option of "Furthermore, the company can assume personal liability and also acquire, retain and dispose of investments domestically and abroad."
Thanks,
Gavin
Proposed translations
(English)
3 +3 | the company may | Steffen Walter |
5 | is entitled to | David Hollywood |
3 | is within its rights to... | gangels (X) |
Proposed translations
+3
11 mins
German term (edited):
die Gesellschaft ist berechtigt
Selected
the company may
I tend to agree with your 'safer' option (with the exception of 'may' instead of 'can') but would word the sentence as follows:
Furthermore, the company may assume personal liability as well as acquire, hold and dispose of (business) interests/investments (both) domestically and abroad.
Furthermore, the company may assume personal liability as well as acquire, hold and dispose of (business) interests/investments (both) domestically and abroad.
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thanks guys"
12 hrs
is entitled to
the way we would say it in English
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:08:15 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
perfect legalese
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:09:49 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
or: is empowered to etc.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:11:13 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
up to you
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:15:35 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I see nothing wrong with "is entitled to"
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs (2016-12-09 04:20:51 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
but "may" etc is ok too
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:08:15 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
perfect legalese
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:09:49 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
or: is empowered to etc.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:11:13 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
up to you
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2016-12-09 04:15:35 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I see nothing wrong with "is entitled to"
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs (2016-12-09 04:20:51 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
but "may" etc is ok too
2 days 15 hrs
is within its rights to...
The company...etc
is more formal, but the simple "may" or "is free to" is also OK.
At least in the US, not sure about the UK.
is more formal, but the simple "may" or "is free to" is also OK.
At least in the US, not sure about the UK.
Discussion
Otherwise, at least in the US, giving an entity the power to assume personal liability, i.e., liability tied to a human, does not make much sense.
(see answer below)