privilège du copartageant

15:03 Aug 21, 2019 

Thanks, everyone. Eliza Hall, I will be passing your observations on to my client (anonymously, of course). Many thanks for such clarity.

07:51 Aug 19, 2019 

Per your comment below (on my comment re your translation), "estate property" is too vague unless something else in the document defines that term specifically (in which case you would probably refer to it as a lien over THE estate property -- i.e. the specific property previously referenced using that term -- not just over estate property).

But I doubt that's going to be the right translation here. The term needing definition, and presumably defined elsewhere in the document, is "la donation-partage dont il s'agit." That's the term to translate and "estate property" doesn't do it.

22:40 Aug 18, 2019 

Pls. let us not be misled by the 'donation-partage' aside. It is for the testator or testatrix to volunteer an inter vivos gift or advancement 'to set up any children in life'. Any intended beneficiaries, whether in Canada or France, would have a hard time staking and registering a privileged or preferential claim to the former's generosity. Otherwise, in *Le cohéritier ou copartageant conserve son privilège sur les biens de chaque lot ou sur le bien licité* 'ou' / or is to be read conjunctively and and not disjunctively.

17:14 Aug 18, 2019 

Ça ne nuirait pas non plus de connaître l'origine du texte. Au Québec, "requérir l'inscription du privilège, c'est procéder à une inscription+dépôt de documents au Bureau de la publicité des droits.

16:19 Aug 18, 2019 

Je pense que pour choisir le terme juste, il faut tenir compte de ce dont on parle: s'agit-il vraiment d'un legs (donation par testament - ce qui justifierait "heir", "legatee", "devisee" - selon le cas) ou d'une donation entre vifs (donees -> grantees) - ce qui semble le cas vu qu'on a un mandant et un mandataire (plutôt qu'un exécuteur/liquidateur). Les conséquences, notamment fiscales, de cette termino ne sont pas les mêmes!

12:46 Aug 17, 2019 

Adrian's got the right meaning but I'm not a fan of his phrasing. A few suggested tweaks:

1. Joint heir. I'm with Ben Gaia on this: the term to use here is joint heir, not coparcener (because that word hardly exists outside of Indian/Hindu succession law), and not joint beneficiary (because that's not the same thing).

2. Lien on [the property in question] (not estate lien). This doesn't sound like a lien on the entire estate; it's a lien on "la donation-partage dont il s'agit." Whatever term you use for "la donation-partage," you should use it or a crystal-clear reference to it (e.g. "the property in question") in this sentence.

For the reason noted by AllegroTrans, you don't need "registrable." And because we already know these are joint heirs, you don't need "for a joint share."

12:39 Aug 17, 2019 

You're right to ask the question, because whoever translated the text you're editing is wrong -- indemnification has nothing to do with this (at best indemnification might have something to do with "soulte," a word you often see in this context, but it's definitely nothing to do with the term "privilège du copartageant").

The P du C is, as Adrian notes, an enforceable lien on property that the copartageant is jointly inheriting. (Usually but not always, copartageants are siblings inheriting their parents' property; in any case, they're always joint heirs.) It acts like a mortgage in that it gives the joint heirs' claim to the property priority over other claims: for example, if the parents owe money to some third party, the joint heirs inherit their share first, and that third party only gets paid if there's still money left over after that.

Liens can be registered (e.g. at the local real property office), which means the public can consult the register and see that the lien exists, or not (in which case the public has no way of knowing that the lien exists). So apparently this POA is giving the mandataire the right to decide whether to have the notary register it or not.

18:45 Aug 16, 2019 

As a fan of Plain English in legal texts I find "Joint Heir" a clearer term.