Incongruity of Civil Law Terms Under Polish and British Legal Systems: A Study of Translation Methods

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 168-183
Author(s):  
Anna Kizińska ◽  
Renata Botwina

Summary The present paper introduces seven Polish and British incongruent terms referring to civil law and makes an attempt to determine the translation methods applied while forming English equivalents for the Polish terms (“mienie”, “rzecz”, “nieruchomość rolna”, “część składowa”, “część składowa rzeczy”, “część składowa gruntu”, “przynależność”). The terms under analysis are the terms that appear at the very beginning of the third section of the Polish Civil Code called “Mienie” and constitute “terms” according to Sager (1990, p.19) and “legal terms” according to the division of terms by Morawski (1980, p. 187). The definitions of the Polish civil law terms are presented beginning with the definitions of a “term” and “equivalence”. The equivalents under analysis have been suggested in the IATE database and the most globally recognised forum for translators, “proz.com”. The research involves comparing the definitions of the terms and, if possible, the suggested equivalents, checking whether the equivalents appear in texts of the sources of the law of the United Kingdom. It has been concluded that the occurrence of system-bound terms as well as the phenomenon of the incongruity of terms make the process of translation extremely challenging, and it is difficult to find the single most adequate equivalent. Furthermore, the translation methods applied while forming the English equivalents have been determined.

2020 ◽  
pp. 336-355
Author(s):  
Ian J. Lloyd

Databases form a vitally important part of the information society. The traditional approach in the United Kingdom has been to protect their contents as compilations under the law of copyright. This contrasts with the approach adopted in civil law states which have historically required a more significant qualitative element as a condition for the award of copyright than has been the case in the United Kingdom. Databases would not meet this requirement – although many states would offer protection under unfair competition laws. The European Union’s database directive strikes something of a compromise between the two approaches. The chapter will consider the extent of the sui generis database right and consider its practical application in the, albeit limited, number of cases in which it has been considered by the courts.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 134
Author(s):  
Anna Triningsih

Law, as an justice institution run its functions through a specific process towards a certain direction in order to achieve justice. Justice now a days is needed as something concrete as the fulfillment of the most basic needs of the community. Law enforcement, in parliamentary life is run by the Government (the executive organs) and through the courts (judicial organ).There are different approaches in law enforcement. The rule of law in the Civil Law System which is shared by the countries in the European continent or land use law, also known as legal approach. In the Common Law System which is shared by the United Kingdom and the United Kingdom speaking countries, using the administration approach of the Administration, called the administration of justice. Implementation of the fundamental principles of the law, or because of its emphasis on the steps of a procedure in the event properly can make the law as an unrealistic myth, inefficient and far from the purpose of    the law and implies the occurrence of loss of trust from the community, while the basic principles of administration, because of its emphasis on the achievement of business objectives efficiently will have implications for the lack of certainty in law enforcement that is essential for the achievement of Justice for everyone. Besides that addition, it also can be an opportunity for the Court arbitrariness because discretion has its wide open room. Every Legal Approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. Making option to choose which legal approach as an appropriate and good policy in law enforcement is related to the characteristics and level of knowledge of the community also the environment where these law applied.


Author(s):  
Margit Cohn

This article challenges common understandings about the distinct features of the so-called “mixed jurisdictions”. One of the main features found in this group of legal systems, it is argued, is that they are civil-law in nature in the sphere of private law, while their public law sphere is typically Anglo-American. I argue that this may be correct as far as the structural elements of these two branches of law, for example with regard to the court structure; it may also be relevant in the context of the general, overarching values underlying both branches of law. However, as far as the detailed arrangements are concerned, a variety of set-ups reflect different types of mixes and combinations in all legal systems, including “mixed jurisdictions”: innovation, transplantation and adoption of which can be traced inter alia to global crosscutting between these two families of legal systems.This argument is developed through an analysis of the evolution of three grounds of review of the administration-unreasonableness, proportionality and legitimate expectations/ administrative promise-in the United Kingdom, the “ancestor” of the common law family of legal systems, and in Israel, currently considered a mixed jurisdiction. I show that both innovation and reliance on civil law constructs can be found in both systems just as much as common law constructs. The influence of EU law, especially ECtHR jurisprudence, renders the public law of the United Kingdom, to a certain extent, to be more civil-law-like than its so-called daughter system. Whether this mix of patterns is an unavoidable result of the irresolvable tension between exclusionism and openness, both willful and subjected, or matter that is particular to the distinct nature of administrative law and its case-by-case development in common law systems is a matter for further consideration. Clearly, though, legal reality, at least in the field studied in this article, challenges the viability of the distinction between “pure” and “mixed” legal systems.


Yuridika ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 427
Author(s):  
Rio Christiawan

AbstractThis article discusses the enforceability of Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 1999 on Fiduciary Guarantee that allows the use of receivables as debt collateral in business practices in Indonesia. Receivables bound by fiduciary collateral is deemed as a special collateral— in the context of civil law, a special collateral will be prioritized in case the debtor does not voluntarily make when due. In business practices, long-term receivables will be established following an agreement between a debtor and a third party, and the receivables that the debtor is entitled to receive from the third party will be provided as collateral to secure the debtor’s obligations under his loan agreement with the creditor. The issue discussed in this paper is the fact that although theoretically special collateral in the form of receivables should be able to increase the creditor’s assurance of getting repaid, in practice long-term receivables put higher risk on the creditor instead. As comparison, this paper uses the accounts receivables fiduciary in the United Kingdom. The Writing Method used in this paper is the normative juridical approach with a focus on conducting juridical studies regarding the creditors' risk in the use of receivables, specifically long-term debt collateral. This paper shows that receivables that are used as collateral in fiduciary agreements actually put the greatest risk on the creditor; especially if the agreement between the debtor and the third party stipulates that in case the debtor fails to fulfil his obligations, all receivables that he is supposed to receive from the third party will be aborted and become non-existent. 


Author(s):  
Ly Tayseng

This chapter gives an overview of the law on contract formation and third party beneficiaries in Cambodia. Much of the discussion is tentative since the new Cambodian Civil Code only entered into force from 21 December 2011 and there is little case law and academic writing fleshing out its provisions. The Code owes much to the Japanese Civil Code of 1898 and, like the latter, does not have a requirement of consideration and seldom imposes formal requirements but there are a few statutory exceptions from the principle of freedom from form. For a binding contract, the agreement of the parties is required and the offer must be made with the intention to create a legally binding obligation and becomes effective once it reaches the offeree. The new Code explicitly provides that the parties to the contract may agree to confer a right arising under the contract upon a third party. This right accrues directly from their agreement; it is not required that the third party declare its intention to accept the right.


Author(s):  
John Chandler ◽  
Elisabeth Berg ◽  
Marion Ellison ◽  
Jim Barry

This chapter discusses the contemporary position of social work in the United Kingdom, and in particular the challenges to what is seen as a managerial-technicist version of social work. The chapter begins with focus on the situation from the 1990s to the present day in which this version of social work takes root and flourishes. The discussion then concentrates on three different routes away from a managerial-technicist social work: the first, reconfiguring professional practice in the direction of evaluation in practice, the second ‘reclaiming social work’ on the Hackney relationship-based model and the third ‘reclaiming social work’ in a more radical, highly politicised way. Special attention is devoted to a discussion about how much autonomy the social workers have in different models, but also what kind of autonomy and for what purpose.


Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 441
Author(s):  
Indah Esti Cahyani ◽  
Aryani Witasari

Nominee agreement is an agreement made between someone who by law can not be the subject of rights to certain lands (property rights), in this case that foreigners (WNA) and Indonesian Citizen (citizen), with the intention that the foreigners can master land de facto property rights, but legal-formal (de jure) land property rights are assigned to his Indonesian citizen. The purpose of this paper isto assess the position of the nominee agreement in Indonesia's legal system and the legal consequences arising in terms of the draft Civil Code and the Law on Agrarian. Agreement is an agreement unnamed nominee made based on the principle of freedom of contract and good faith of the parties. However, it should be noted that the law prohibits foreigners make agreements / related statement stock wealth / property (land) for and on behalf of others, sehingga the legal consequences of the agreement is the nominee of the agreement is not legally enforceable because the agreement was made on a false causa.Keywords: Nominee Agreement; Property Rights; Foreigners.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document