Glossary entry (derived from question below)
French term or phrase:
la responsabilité civile d\'un tiers serait partiellement engagée
English translation:
(should) a third party be held partially liable
French term
la responsabilité civile d'un tiers serait partiellement engagée
En cas d'Accident de la circulation lorsque la Responsabilité Civile vous est acquise, votre défense Civile est assumée par l'Assureur devant toutes juridictions en cas d'action judiciaire mettant en jeu simultanément vos intérêts et les nôtres.
A l'occasion de cette action judiciaire, l'Assureur peut se charger de votre représentation personnelle, dans la mesure où la responsabilité civile d'un tiers serait partiellement engagée.
Dec 21, 2022 23:44: AllegroTrans changed "Edited KOG entry" from "<a href="/profile/626010">AllegroTrans's</a> old entry - "la responsabilité civile d\'un tiers serait partiellement engagée"" to ""(should) a third party be held partiallt liable""
Proposed translations
(should) a third party be held responsible in part
Me semble-t-il.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2022-12-20 12:39:46 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
...be held civilly liable in part ?
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 days 5 hrs (2022-12-23 16:39:57 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eliza Hall's comment.
She appears to ignore the use of the conditional: "should (= if) a third party be (were) held partially liable", e.g. at a later stage.
I would agree with her interpretation ("talking about something that happens much earlier, as soon as a claim is filed") if the source text said: dans la mesure où la responsabilité civile d'un tiers serait partiellement recherchée.
It doesn't.
As a translator, I'll stick to what words mean (engager la responsabilité = to be/to hold liable) in the absence of any other context to the contrary.
Re: Adrian MM.'s comment.
I'm afraid I don't understand it.
Thanks! |
Thanks but I think "liable" is preferable to "responsible" |
a third party is held partly to blame in tort (as a matter of Civil Liability)
Cut to contributory negligence and fault, notably Lord Denning's car seat(-)belt case of Froom vs. Butcher (1976).
Contributory negligence is a common law tort rule which bars plaintiffs from recovering for the negligence of others if they too were negligent in causing the harm. ....replaced in many jurisdictions with the doctrine of comparative negligence.
The law of contributory negligence arising from a failure to wear a seat belt was developed in the seminal High Court case Froom v Butcher (1976). In this case the driver of the vehicle was not wearing his seat belt and suffered head and chest injuries.
disagree |
Eliza Hall
: Same reason as on "vous est acquise": defense costs are being assumed at the outset of litigation, BEFORE anyone is held liable.
1 day 6 hrs
|
paradoxically, you have jumped the gun about defens/ce costs.
|
|
agree |
Mpoma
: Yup. Eliza's conviction (I don't mean she should be locked up for this) makes me wonder whether there's some Transatlantic difference here...
2 days 5 hrs
|
civil liability of a third party is also involved / liability insurance of a third party is invoked
the civil liability of a third party would be partially engaged.
But the main thing that's bugging me, is "serait" it's most correct translation is "would be" but i guess you can also use "is" instead, as others are suggestings.
Thanks but this sounds very translationese to me |
when a third party is partly responsible for civil libility
engagée can be translated in several ways and in this case it is pretty tricky. In the comments, someone used this construction with "be".
serait again is tricky to translate. Typically, "would be", "should" are preferred. "When"...expresses the meaning correctly.
Something went wrong...