GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
18:22 Mar 22, 2014 |
Norwegian to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Law (general) / claims | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Charles Ek United States Local time: 02:42 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 | (claiming) recourse against a prior owner |
| ||
3 | does rely upon a 'leapfrog' recourse claim against a contract non-privy |
|
(claiming) recourse against a prior owner Explanation: What distinguishes this situation is the "springende" aspect. It refers to jumping over the seller and making a claim against a prior owner for a defect in the property. Such an action is authorized in § 35 of forbrukerkjøpsloven. Ordnett offers a wordy English version of "right of recourse against an earlier party in the chain of title". That is technically true if you read the act, but I'm not convinced you need anything beyond "prior owner". Can you provide more of the text, so I can see the context just to be sure? -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 50 mins (2014-03-22 19:12:18 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Here's a good discussion of "springende regress" that I should have included: http://jusinfo.no/index.php?site=default/721/1491/1562/1563 -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2014-03-22 19:22:57 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- The semi-official translation of § 84 of kjøpsloven has it as "claiming against prior sales stage(s):" – http://www.ub.uio.no/ujur/ulovdata/lov-19880513-027-eng.pdf –which is easily one of the worst literal legal translations I've come across. I'll take a look at some sales of goods acts from the UK and the U.S. and come back to you here. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2014-03-22 19:44:47 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- On the basis of the context you've provided, I'll revise my suggestion to "claiming recourse against a party to a previous contract". See the discussion of this on pages 463-64 at http://tinyurl.com/ngpwl34 |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
does rely upon a 'leapfrog' recourse claim against a contract non-privy Explanation: vs. the device of collateral warranty in EN law and which is entered into, impliedly or expressly,ancillary to the primary contract. Ronald Craig: NO/EN Juridisk Ordbok, Kontraktsrett> springende regress. Compare direct action against an earlier party in the chain of title with whom the contract party had no privity of contract (landlord-tenant estate?) = ikke medkontrahent. Quaere: whether a warehehouser can be described as an 'owner' in a chain of 'title' to goods vs. land. Example sentence(s):
Reference: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direktekrav |
| |
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.