Préjudice (clause)

English translation: (limitation of) liability

11:58 Mar 20, 2020
French to English translations [PRO]
Bus/Financial - Law: Contract(s)
French term or phrase: Préjudice (clause)
Hi everyone,

I've looked at the Kudoz entries for this term and I'm not entirely sure the translations suggested are suitable when it is the header of a clause.

I get the feeling that the equivalent in English would be a "liability" or "limitation of liability" (clause).

For a bit of context, here's the first sentence in that clause:

"La responsabilité de chacune des Parties pourra être engagée, dans les conditions de droit commun, à raison des dommages directs et prévisibles subis par chacune des parties."

It then goes on to state that the parties will not be held liable for indirect (consequential?) damages for lost time, profits, etc.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Séverine Watson
France
Local time: 18:42
English translation:(limitation of) liability
Explanation:
I agree with you. It's important that the headline reflect the content of the clause rather than being translated literally.

Either of your alternatives is fine.
Selected response from:

philgoddard
United States
Grading comment
Selected automatically based on peer agreement.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
4 +3(limitation of) liability
philgoddard
3Loss or damage incurred
Adrian MM.
3harm
SafeTex


Discussion entries: 2





  

Answers


4 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +3
(limitation of) liability


Explanation:
I agree with you. It's important that the headline reflect the content of the clause rather than being translated literally.

Either of your alternatives is fine.

philgoddard
United States
Meets criteria
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 317
Grading comment
Selected automatically based on peer agreement.
Notes to answerer
Asker: Great, thanks Phil. Any strong feelings about whether to translate "dommages indirects" as indirect or consequential damages? I'm translating for a UK audience.


Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  ph-b (X): as a title - perhaps with capitals: Limitation of Liability?
5 hrs

agree  Paul Stevens
5 hrs

agree  Eliza Hall: Just "Liability." The clause isn't only about limitations on liability; the first sentence, for instance, says what the parties may be liable for.
8 hrs

neutral  Daryo: the headline should reflect the content of the clause - agree entirely on that // ideally you need to find a similar standard clause in the target language and use the usual label for that type of clause.
14 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
Préjudice (clause header)
Loss or damage incurred


Explanation:
Better ask about indirect in another law- or insurance-headed question as unclear whether a literal translation of 'indirects' or a brilliant one for 'par ricochet': ....the parties will not be held liable for indirect (consequential?) damages = losses (and, unless AmE / see Microsoft's online T&C, not monetary compensation) for lost time, profits, etc

Example sentence(s):
  • IATE: the owner or operator shall be entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered. eur-lex.europa.eu le propriétaire ou l'exploitant est en droit de demander une indemnisation pour tout préjudice ou dommage subi.

    Reference: http://www.proz.com/personal-glossaries/entry/3615374-prejud...
    Reference: http://iate.europa.eu/search/standard/result/1584706181507/1
Adrian MM.
Austria
Meets criteria
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 86

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  AllegroTrans
52 mins
  -> Thanks. Loss on its own is rather trite.

disagree  Eliza Hall: Losses incurred and losses for which XYZ is liable are two different things.
8 hrs
  -> You are falling into the trap set of extrapolating liability from the neutral term of Préjudice when the clause goes on to spell out an exemption.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

6 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
harm


Explanation:
I'm not saying this is better than the others. The translation often depends on the types of "dommages"

Goods and property = damage or loss
Profits, etc = Loss
Reputation etc. = harm

I often find that when talking summarily about "dommage", like in a heading, or when talking generally , that the only one that looks right is "harm"

Take Coronavirus and say to yourself

"Coronovirus is going to cause a lot of ??? to the economy."

Which word fits best for you "loss, damage or harm"?

But context is important of course and you can't always use "harm"

Regards

SafeTex
France
Local time: 18:42
Meets criteria
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 52

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
neutral  Daryo: "harm" is too restrictive
8 hrs
  -> Yes, for a heading it doesn't work but in the text, it's a contender. I did explain this in my answer
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)



Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.

KudoZ™ translation help

The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.


See also:
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search