@ Asker 12:24 Apr 11, 2018
It's not really a problem of legal vocabulary — though it is sometimes the drafting that makes things complicated; that's what makes legal translation such a highly specialized field — and a minefield for the unwary!
It would help if, instead of giving us snippets of your text, you just gave us the complete section.
On the face of it, your text seems to be saying that the Producer has a responsibility TOWARDS (à l’égard de) the Director to do something; so far, that could make perfect sense.
But as I keep on saying, the odd thing is the use of 'solidairement' with a singular party — which tends to be confirmed by the singular agreement on 'obligé'. Now I am not in any way a legal expert, but I don't understand in at least everyday language terms how one person can be 'jointly' liable or responsible for anything? Normally, the use of 'joint' implies a minimum of 2 parties!
This curious usage is why I keep insisting on more context, to see if we can glean further clues on this point. Is there any mention anywhere of someone with whom the 'Producer' might be said to be acting 'jointly'?
If it were 'acting jointly with the Director', I find "à l’égard de..." rather curious? | 
peer agreement (net): -2
