Advertising
LEO

It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.

Would you like to support LEO?

Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.

 
  •  
  • Subject

    entfallen auf

    Sources
    "4.1Der Gewinn für das laufende Jahr, der auf den in Ziff. 3.1 genannten Teil-Geschäftsanteil entfällt, steht dem Erschienenen zu 1. und dem Erschienenen zu 4. zeitanteilig zu. "
    Comment
    In continuation of the "Teilgeschäftsanteil"-thread here's another goody for you ;-)

    The profit for the current year allotted to the [partial share] referred to in clause 3.1 above shall be due to the person appearing for the first part and the person appearing for the fourth part on a pro rata temporis basis.

    'ow'zat???
    Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 14:07
    Comment
    The current year's profits attributable to the [shares des Grauens], ...



    Bestätigung/Korrektur durch native speaker willkommen.
    #1AuthorGaleazzo08 Sep 09, 14:18
    Comment
    *fadeneinsammel*
    #2AuthorGaleazzo (259943) 08 Sep 09, 14:28
    Comment
    Ich würde dann aber "attributed to" vorziehen - sonst noch jemand mit Senf? Gern willkommen ;-)
    #3Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 14:29
    Comment
    Maybe:

    The persons appearing under 1 and 4 shall be entitled to the profit for the current year from the [disposal of the] part shares set out in clause 3.1 on a pro rata temporis basis.
    #4Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 14:30
    Comment
    I would work with "business interest" here, too.

    The profit for the current year, attributable to the business interest cited in Clause 3.1, ...

    evtl.
    #5Author dude (253248) 08 Sep 09, 14:40
    Comment
    I think "business interest" is far too vague.
    #6Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 14:41
    Comment
    And it'S getting too wordy - "person appearing for the first part", "business interest" and maybe a rephrasing of "Teilgeschäftsanteil" - OMFG ...
    #7Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 14:43
    Comment
    "person appearing for the first part" makes no sense to me whatsoever. Meouw!
    #8Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 14:45
    Comment
    Okay, any better idea for "Erschienener zu 1"?
    #9Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 14:47
    Comment
    #9 - Vielleicht, wenn Du uns erklärst, was damit gemeint ist.
    #10AuthorGaleazzo, wieder ohne Blau08 Sep 09, 14:49
    Comment
    @Bennett: to me, if this is about stocks, I'd use shares, but if it's about a business, then each partner has a business interest in this business. At least that's how I've always known it.
    #11Author dude (253248) 08 Sep 09, 14:50
    Comment
    Well, in #4 I have worked on the assumption that it actually means the person mentioned under section 4 [of whatever it is]. That is, the person who is named under 4. Granted, that might not be the case.
    #12Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 14:51
    Comment
    https://tdict.leo.org/forum/alphabeticIndex.p...

    Das ist die Parteibezeichnung in einem notariellen Vertrag. Da steht "vor dem unterzeichneten Notar erschienen heute

    1. Herr Meier

    2. Herr Müller

    3. Herr Lehmann

    4. Herr Joe Bloggs"

    und die werden danach nur als "Erschienene zu 1." etc. bezeichnet ...
    #13Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 14:52
    Comment
    @ dude

    To my knowledge, it concerns shares in a company (in other words: a business) which cannot be sold on a stock market because of the legal form the business takes, i.e. a GmbH.
    #14Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 14:53
    Comment
    I would just use something like:

    the person mentioned under 1

    It has already been mentioned that this person appeared before the notary to witness the document being signed or whatever. Because of this, I would not stick too closely to the source in this case.
    #15Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 14:57
    Comment
    the 1st party and the 4th party

    ?

    Wie in Richards 9 und 11 hier? related discussion: "Beklagter zu 1"
    #16AuthorGaleazzo08 Sep 09, 15:01
    Comment
    Für die 'Erschienenen' vielleicht so wie bei der Konkurrenz vorgeschlagen?: http://www.dict.cc/deutsch-englisch/die+Ersch...
    #17AuthorRiKo08 Sep 09, 15:02
    Comment
    Galeazzo, mm, auch nicht schlecht ...

    RiKo, "appeared" find ich ganz doof ;-)
    #18Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 15:02
    Comment
    Muss in der Übersetzung an jeder Stelle wirklich das Erscheinen erscheinen? Reicht es nicht, wenn das Erschienensein in der Eröffnungspassage deutlich wird und danach nur noch von "Party of the first part" und "Party of the nth part" gesprochen wird? Immer noch quite a mouthful, aber kein Stolperstein mehr in einem juristischen Text.
    #19Authorhilfesuch08 Sep 09, 15:11
    Comment
    Ja, klar, viiel besser!
    #20Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 15:12
    Comment
    Some legal phrases should, in my opinion, be avoided. One such phrase is "party of the first part".
    #21Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 15:15
    Comment
    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

    Why, Bennett, after all it IS a legal text ;-)
    #22Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 15:16
    Comment
    Use something else instead, maybe:

    the party named/mentioned in/under 1

    @ Bubb

    I know you like your legalese, but let's not forget that the text should also be readable. Such phrases only serve to hinder the ability of the average man to understand the text before him.

    Edit:

    But legal texts can also be written using a smidgen of "plain English".
    #23Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 15:19
    Comment
    Unless the text is not intended to be read by Joe Public but by a notary public - or some other legal eagle...
    #24Authorhilfesuch08 Sep 09, 15:23
    Comment
    Even if you assume that the vast majority of the target audience have had some legal training, you should (in my opinion) always strive to write using plain English, wherever possible.
    #25Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 15:25
    Comment
    In this case the "target" is an English lawyer - it's to serve as an explanation of the German document which has to be notarised, so I should be as exact as can be ;-)
    #26Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 15:38
    Comment
    Here is a little more " Senf" :

    The parties named under 1. and 4. are entitled on a pro rata temporis basis to the profit of the current fiscal year that is allotted to the respective partial interest in the business stated under 3.1.

    :-))
    #27Author Helmi (U.S.) (236620) 08 Sep 09, 15:38
    Comment
    Aah, I like that particular "Sempf", but would use "shall be entitled" instead of "are entitled" ;-)
    #28Author B.L.Z. Bubb (601295) 08 Sep 09, 15:39
    Comment
    Helmi, schön! Noch 'ne Stimme für "shall be" - obwohl, ich lese immer öfter, dass das in modern legal English möglichst vermieden werden sollte...
    #29Authorhilfesuch08 Sep 09, 15:42
    Comment
    The parties named under 1. and 4. - That's what I'm getting at.
    #30Author Bennett (395232) 08 Sep 09, 15:43
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
  automatisch zu   umgewandelt