Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Criminal Proceedings, Languages and the European Union pp 57–70Cite as

Translation and Interpretation of EU Multilingual Legal Acts: The Viewpoint of a Comparative Private Lawyer

Legal Translation and European Legal Discourse: Some Peculiarities of European Private Law Terminology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 796 Accesses

Abstract

The paper underlines some specific aspects of EU act and case law legal terminology. From a semantic point of view, some peculiarities of the EU’s legal terms depend on the methodology adopted by the drafters, which is based more on linguistic coherence than on legal equivalence. However, EU acts and case law also contain implicit national legal models, that is to say, rules that have the same legal effects at the national and EU levels—and are clearly the product of the circulation of pre-existent national legal models—but lack any corresponding conceptual denomination. The article states that these aspects of EU legal discourse should not be ignored by the drafters of the new European legal instruments, particularly the “Common European Sales Law”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Sacco (2001), p. 34; Sacco (2005), p. 1 ss.; Endicott (2002).

  2. 2.

    The policy of multilingualism (Article 217 of the E.C. Treaty: “The rules governing the languages of the institutions of the Community shall ....[omissis]…be determined by the Council, acting unanimously.”) was laid down for the first time in the first Regulation adopted by the Council after the entry into force of the Treaty of Rome on 1 January 1958. The Regulation still constitutes the legal basis for multilingualism within the EU and has never been changed, but simply being updated every time a new Member State joins. According to the Regulation, all the official and working languages of the institutions are placed on an equal footing. The Regulation distinguishes between working and official languages, without giving any definition of the two categories, and prescribes (Article 4) that regulations and other documents of general application shall be drafted in all the official languages.

  3. 3.

    Boulouis (1991).

  4. 4.

    See, for all, Šarčević (2000).

  5. 5.

    Raworth (1993) and Wainwright (1996).

  6. 6.

    See Case 283/81, Judgement of the Court of 6 October 1982, Srl CILFIT and Lanificio di Gavardo SpA v Ministry of Health.

  7. 7.

    Gambaro (2004), p. 287.

  8. 8.

    Gambaro (1988), p. 1010.

  9. 9.

    Mateo (2006), p. 162.

  10. 10.

    Ioriatti Ferrari (2009).

  11. 11.

    Joint Practical Guide of the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission for persons involved in the drafting of legislation within the community institutions (Interinstitutional Agreement of 22 December 1998 on common guidelines for the quality of drafting of Community legislation, OJ C 73, 17.3.1999, p. 1).

  12. 12.

    Manual of Precedents for acts established within the Council of the European Union, Secretariat General European Union Council (legal-linguistic experts), July 2002.

  13. 13.

    See, for further details, Ioriatti Ferrari (2009).

  14. 14.

    See, in particular, Case C-452/93 P Magdalena Fernández v Commission [1994] ECR I-4295, paragraph 22; Case C-372/02 Adanez-Vega [2004] ECR I-10761, paragraph 37; and Case C-66/08 Kozłowski [2008] ECR I-0000.

  15. 15.

    Commission Regulation (EC) No. 280/2009 of 6 April 2009 amending Annexes I, II, III, and IV to Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters.

  16. 16.

    C-533/07, European Court of Justice, 23 April 2009. Falco Privatstiftung e Thomas Rabitsch against Gisela Weller-Lindhorst (Oberster Gerichtshof—Austria).

  17. 17.

    Sacco (1991), p. 217.

  18. 18.

    Hirsch Ballin and Senden (2005).

  19. 19.

    Derlén (2007).

  20. 20.

    See Ajani and Rossi (2006), p. 132.

  21. 21.

    Cosmai (2007), p. 28.

  22. 22.

    Ferrarese (2008), p. 13 ff.; Belvedere (1994), p. 21.

  23. 23.

    Sacco (2003), p. 88.

  24. 24.

    Tribunale Trapani, 9 June 2010.

  25. 25.

    Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters.

  26. 26.

    1. A person domiciled in a Member State may, in another Member State, be sued:

    1. (a)

      In matters relating to a contract, in the courts for the place of performance of the obligation in question;

    2. (b)

      For the purpose of this provision and unless otherwise agreed, the place of performance of the obligation in question shall be:

    3. –

      In the case of the sale of goods, the place in a Member State where, under the contract, the goods were delivered or should have been delivered,

    4. –

      In the case of the provision of services, the place in a Member State where, under the contract, the services were provided or should have been provided.

  27. 27.

    Case C-381/08, Judgement of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 February 2010, Car Trim GmbH v KeySafety Systems Srl. Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof (Germany). The referring court is asking the Court of Justice, in essence, how “contracts for the sale of goods” are to be distinguished from “contracts for the provision of services”, within the meaning of Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation No. 44/2001.

  28. 28.

    Sacco (1992), p. 43 ff.

  29. 29.

    Sacco (2007).

  30. 30.

    Staub (1902), p. 93.

  31. 31.

    Stoll (1932), p. 257.

  32. 32.

    Savatier (1951), p. 168; Rabut (1948), p. 72.

  33. 33.

    Canaris (1983), p. 822; Benatti (1991), p. 221 ff.; Benatti (1960), p. 1342; Castronovo (1977), p. 123 ff; more recently, Varanese (2005), Lambo (2005).

  34. 34.

    Carai (2010).

  35. 35.

    Lambo (2005), p. 174. The Nord American system has solved this problem by creating a hybrid model—between “contractual liability” and “no-contractual liability”—the tortiuos breach of contract that contains elements of both liabilities: Carai (2010).

  36. 36.

    Proposal for a Council Directive on the liability of suppliers of services, COM (90) 482 final, 20 December 1990.

  37. 37.

    Castronovo (1994), p. 273 ff.

  38. 38.

    Case F-50/09, Judgement of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 May 2011, Livio Missir Mamachi di Lusignano v European Commission, Public service—Officials—Action for damages.

  39. 39.

    The Civil Service Tribunal dismissed the action on the grounds that the Union is obliged to protect its officials only against actions by third parties that the officials suffer by virtue of their position or duties. According to the Court, the applicant’s son was not murdered for reasons connected with his position and duties: “He was the target of a common criminal, who attacked him, his wife and his possessions without any knowledge of the victim’s position as an official of the Union or of the nature of his duties. The criminal probably thought that the occupants of the villa where he committed his crimes had a higher standard of living than the average inhabitant of Rabat, but neither that circumstance nor the posting of the applicant’s son to Morocco nor the occupancy of accommodation chosen by the Commission establish that the official was targeted because of that position and by reason of his duties”. Decision, p. 224.

  40. 40.

    In support of his case, the claimant cited a leading precedent from the European Court of Justice, in which an employee of the European Commission claimed compensation for failure to guarantee a healthy work environment, Case C-181/03 Albert Nardone v. European Commission. The circulation of the model is quite evident in the appeal to precedent; the category “obblighi di protezione” was also accepted implicitly in Italy for the first time in a case concerning damages resulting from a tenant’s use of an unhealthy habitation, Court of Appeal, Rome, 30 March 1971. The case involved the damage done to the health of the wife and daughters of a tenant due to the unhealthiness of their accommodation. The claims, rejected by the lower court (Tribunale Roma), were accepted by the Court of Appeal in Rome, which, although did not explicitly make reference to the violation of an “obbligo di protezione”, nevertheless recognised the wife’s and daughter’s right to compensation.

  41. 41.

    Italian version: obblighi di protezione. French version: obbligations de sécurité. German version: Verplifchtung zum Schutz.

  42. 42.

    Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on European Contract Law, Brussels, 11.07.2001, COM(2001) 398 final.

  43. 43.

    See http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_int/safe_shop/fair_bus_pract/cont_law/index_en.htm.

  44. 44.

    Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights.

  45. 45.

    Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. A more coherent European contract law. An action plan. Brussels, 12.2.2003 COM(2003) 68 final.

  46. 46.

    Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on a Common European Sale Law, Brussels, 11.10.2011, COM(2011) 635 final, 2011/0284 (COD).

  47. 47.

    Examples of the problems raised by the EU terminology in the area of criminal procedure in Di Paolo (2013), p. 161 ff.

  48. 48.

    Meli (2011).

  49. 49.

    Mellinkoff (1963).

  50. 50.

    See Heddinger et al. (1988); Creech (2004); de Witte (2004).

  51. 51.

    Sacco (2005), p. 21.

  52. 52.

    See further details in Ioriatti Ferrari (2011), p. 329 ff.

  53. 53.

    Sacco (1992).

Abbreviations

CFR:

Common Frame of Reference

ECJ:

European Court of Justice

EEC:

European Economic Community

EU:

European Union

MEPs:

Members of the European Parliament

OJ:

Official Journal

TEU:

Treaty on European Union

VAT:

Value added tax

References

  • Ajani G, Rossi P (2006) Coerenza del diritto privato europeo e multilinguismo In: Pozzo B, Jacometti V (eds) Le politiche linguistiche delle Istituzioni comunitarie dopo l’allargamento. Giuffré, Milano, p 132 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belvedere A (1994) Linguaggio giuridico. In: Digesto delle discipline privatistiche, vol XV. Utet, Torino, p 21 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Benatti F (1960) Osservazioni in tema di doveri di protezione. In: Rivista trimestrale di diritto e procedura civile, p 1342 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Benatti F (1991) Doveri di protezione. In: Digesto delle discipline privatistiche, vol VII. Utet, Torino, p 221 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulouis J (1991) Quelques réflexions à propos du langue juridique communautaire. In : Droits - Revue français de théorie juridique, p 101

    Google Scholar 

  • Canaris CW (1983) Norme di protezione, obblighi del traffico, doveri di protezione. In: Rivista Critica di Diritto Privato, p 822 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Carai M (2010) Gli Obblighi di protezione nella prospettiva comparatistica del common law e del trasporto aereo di persone. http://eprints.uniss.it/3538/

  • Castronovo C (1977) Obblighi di protezione e tutela del terzo. In: Jus, p 123 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Castronovo C (1994) La responsabilità del prestatore di servizi nella proposta di direttiva comunitaria. In: Foro Italiano, p 273 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosmai D (2007) Tradurre per l’Unione europea. Hoepli, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Creech RL (2004) Law and Language in the European Union. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen

    Google Scholar 

  • de Witte B (2004) Language Law of the European Union: Protecting or Eroding Linguistic Diversity. In: Craufurd Smith R (ed) Culture and the European Union Law. Oxford University Press, New York, p 205 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Derlén M (2007) A Castle in the Air. The Complexity of the Multilingual Interpretation of European Community Law. In: Umeå Studies in Law, Umeå

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Paolo G (2013) The Exchange of Information Extracted from the Criminal Record: The Heterogeneity of the National Legal Systems and Problems of Language. In: Ruggieri F, Marcolini S (eds) Criminal Proceedings, Languages and the European Union. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Endicott T (2002) Law and Language. In: Zalta E.M (ed) The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Standford, CA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrarese MR (2008) Interpretazione e traduzione: da una cultura giuridica “introversa” ad una cultura giuridica “estroversa. In: Ioriatti Ferrari E (ed) Interpretazione e traduzione del diritto. Cedam, Padova, p 13 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambaro A (1988) “Jura et Leges” nel processo di edificazione di un diritto privato europeo. Europa e Diritto Privato 1010 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambaro A (2004) A proposito del plurilinguismo legislativo europeo. Rivista Trimestrale di Diritto e Procedura Civile 287 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Heddinger FJ, Hubalek A, Pramberger M (1988) Introduction to the Law and Language of the European Union. Verlag Orac, Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch Ballin EMH, Senden LAJ (2005) Co-actorship in the Development of European Law-Making. The Quality of European Legislation and Its Implementation and Application in the National Legal Orders. T.M.C, Hasser Press, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioriatti Ferrari E (2009) Linguistic Precedent and Nomadic Meanings in EC Private Law. Revista General de Derecho Público Comparado, No. 6

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioriatti Ferrari E (2011) Draft Common Frame of Reference and Terminology. In: Antoniolli A, Fiorentini F (eds) A Factual Assessment of the Draft Common Frame of Reference. Sellier, München, pp 343–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambo L (2005) Obblighi di protezione. Cedam, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • Mateo FP (2006) La técnica normativa en el sistema juridíco comunitario. Cuadernos de Derecho Público 162 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Meli M (2011) Diritto europeo dei contratti: evoluzione del quadro normativo, XI Giornata REI - Bruxelles, 20 May 2011 - Diritto europeo dei contratti e traduzione. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/rei/documenti/giornate/11rei_programma.pdf

  • Mellinkoff D (1963) The Language of the Law. Little Brown and Company, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabut A (1948) De la notion de faute en droit privé. Libr. général de droit et de jurisprudence ed., Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Raworth P (1993) The Legislative Process in the European Community. Kluwer Law Taxation Publisher, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco R (1991) Dottrina (Fonte del diritto). In: Digesto delle discipline privatistiche, vol VII. Utet, Torino, p 217 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco R (1992) Introduzione al diritto comparato. Utet, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco R (2001) Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco R (2003) Concepts juridiques er création du droit communautaire par le juge. In: Schulze R and Seif U (eds) Richterrecht und Rechtsfortbildung in der Europäischen Rechtsgemeinschaft. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, p 88 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco R (2005) Language and Law. In: Pozzo B (ed) Ordinary Language and Legal Language. Giuffrè, Milano, p 1 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco R (2007) Antropologia giuridica. Contributo ad una macrostoria del diritto. Il Mulino, Bologna

    Google Scholar 

  • Šarčević S (2000) New Approach to Legal Translation. Kluwer Law International, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Savatier R (1951) Traité de la responsabilità civile en droit français, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Staub H (1902) Die positiven Vertragsverletzungen und ihre Rechtsfolgen. In: Festschrift für der XXVI Deutschen Juristentag, p 93 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll H (1932) Abschied von der Lehre der positiven Vertragsverletzungen. In: Archiv für die civilistiche Praxis, p 257 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Varanese G (2005) Contratto con effetti protettivi. Edizioni scientifiche italiane, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • Wainwright R (1996) Techniques of Drafting European Community Legislation: Problems of Interpretation. Statute Law Rev 17(1) 7 ff

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Law Faculty, University of Trento, Via Verdi, No. 53, 38122, Trento, Italy

    Elena Ioriatti Ferrari

Authors
  1. Elena Ioriatti Ferrari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elena Ioriatti Ferrari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Law, Economics and Culture, University of Insubria, Como, Italy

    Francesca Ruggieri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ferrari, E.I. (2014). Translation and Interpretation of EU Multilingual Legal Acts: The Viewpoint of a Comparative Private Lawyer. In: Ruggieri, F. (eds) Criminal Proceedings, Languages and the European Union. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37152-3_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation