Glossary entry (derived from question below)
Russian term or phrase:
нарушения норм материального или процессуального законодательства судом первой
English translation:
violation of the substantive or procedural law by the first instance court
Added to glossary by
Dmitry Golovin
Apr 12, 2007 17:20
17 yrs ago
4 viewers *
Russian term
нарушения норм материального или процессуального законодательства судом первой
Russian to English
Other
Law (general)
phrase
нарушения норм материального или процессуального законодательства судом первой инстанци,являющихся основанием к отмене обжалуемого решения.
Proposed translations
(English)
4 +3 | violation of the substantive or procedural law by the first instance court | Dmitry Golovin |
4 | material viollation of the law by the lower court giving grounds for... | The Misha |
Proposed translations
+3
28 mins
Selected
violation of the substantive or procedural law by the first instance court
IMHO
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "thank you"
7 mins
material viollation of the law by the lower court giving grounds for...
... (reversal on) appeal. I would simply say "grounds for appeal" which sounds better and more authentic (also, there's never a guarantee the court of appeals will reverse, even given sufficient ground), but if you want to stay closer to the text use the insert in brackets.
Peer comment(s):
neutral |
ruslingua
: "material violation" я бы понял как "существенное нарушение"
26 mins
|
That's exactly what I meant. In the US court papers I've seen they do not usually specify what kind of a violation it is. You can say "technical or material violation" but it sounds less authentic
|
|
agree |
Dorene Cornwell
: Here you need material or procedural... though
4 hrs
|
disagree |
George_aslf
: you have completely missed the point. There is a substantive law (материальное право) and a procedural law (процессуальное право). Dmitry Golovin gave a perfect translation. Your "material violation" means существенное нарушение закона
12 hrs
|
And that's exactly what I meant to say, to preserve at least some semblance of the original "material. In original US court papers they do not usually differenttiate between procedural (that would be "technical") and substantive for appeal purposes
|
Something went wrong...