Laedens

10:49 Nov 9, 2012 

Thanks, Steven, for the refinement. My intended meaning in doing the translation was to refer simply, in your words, to the "one who caused the damage" without involving the litigation aspects. And for this I was looking for a better English term.

The word "party" could indeed imply litigation, but "opponents to the claim" seems to do so more strongly. Since the text I am translating is not legal text itself but a discussion about certain points of law, I am inclined to use the term "injuring party" as long as it is separately defined as "the one who caused the damage" beforehand. Does this approach seem reasonable?

10:10 Nov 9, 2012 

"The Dutch term "laedens" refers to the "opponents to a claim for compensation" or the "injuring party"."

I'm not sure that is correct. Yes, if you claim compensation for damages, then that person will be your opponent. But one can be "laedens" (the one who caused the damage) and not be an opponent in litigation. The two are different terms.

"Injuring party" might also be imprecise, because of the use of the word "party" (which also implies that you are in the context of a litigation).

What I am trying to say is that a "laedens" is still a "laedens" even if no litigation has been started.

I'm not a "civilist" though - others might refine this remark.