Apr 26, 2004 10:12
20 yrs ago
3 viewers *
German term
Spain
Julie Neill, BA (Hons), MCIL, MITI
Qualified & Experienced
Native in: English 
Works in: German to English
anteilig
German to English
Law/Patents
Law (general)
In a document about sending payment orders by fax, the bank has a duty to check that orders are not forged, etc.
Bei einer Verletzung dieser Kontrollpflicht ist Ihr Verschulden anteilig zu berücksichtigen.
Bei einer Verletzung dieser Kontrollpflicht ist Ihr Verschulden anteilig zu berücksichtigen.
Proposed translations
(English)
Proposed translations
6 hrs
Selected
proportionately
If there is a breach of this duty of supervision, your [who is Ihr? the bank? it makes a difference] fault will be taken proportionately into account.
I'm only responding because I disagreed with Counsel, who protests, and the system doesn't allow me to reply any other way.
Sorry, I did not realize the asker was in the UK. I commented on the 'contributory negligence' because you cite the 'Lectric Law Library, a US site!
I'm only responding because I disagreed with Counsel, who protests, and the system doesn't allow me to reply any other way.
Sorry, I did not realize the asker was in the UK. I commented on the 'contributory negligence' because you cite the 'Lectric Law Library, a US site!
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thanks to everyone for their contributions. Awarding the points is difficult because several of you provided helpful background and I used bits from various answers for my final translation but I liked the way Margaret expressed the meaning simply."
2 mins
Lydia Molea
Germany
Germany
Native in German
Specializes in field
Germany
Quality - Professionalism - Reliability
Native in: German
Works in: English to German, German to English, Spanish to German, and 1 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
75
2 mins
proportionately / proportionally
.
3 mins
[taken into account] on a pro rata basis
or proportionate basis.
3 mins
Steffen Walter
Germany
Germany
Native in German
Germany
Top-Notch Service | Direct Clients Only
Native in: German (Variant: Germany) 
Works in: English to German, German to English, French to German, and 1 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
438
prorated / on a prorated basis / pro-rata
This seems to refer to the amount involved in a dubious transaction (meaning that the person has to pay a share of the total if not complying with control duties).
2 hrs
(your contributory negligence) will be rateably factored into
'...any breach of this supervisory duty'
- taking the question back to Ihr Verschulden.
Pro rated already in ProZ glossary.
'The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon On * Contributory Negligence *.
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE - Prevents a party from recovering for ...'
- taking the question back to Ihr Verschulden.
Pro rated already in ProZ glossary.
'The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon On * Contributory Negligence *.
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE - Prevents a party from recovering for ...'
Reference:
Peer comment(s):
| disagree |
Margaret Marks
: As the link shows, the Americans would say 'comparative negligence' here, because 'contributory negligence' follows the common-law rule that any c.n. whatsoever removes your claim.
1 hr
|
|
What's the US got to do with this question? The asker is in the UK. Also the UK Law Reform (Contrib. Neg.) Act 1945 says the court - IN TORT - can reduce damages and apportion liability. Lord Denning did so in the seatbelt case of Froom v. Butcher.
|
|
| agree |
Alarch Gwyn
: If a claimant is less than 10 % responsible for the loss he/she can enforce the claim in full (Johnson v. Tennant Bros Ltd 1954); the defendant also has to prove causation
1 day 7 mins
|
|
Nice quote. I was obviously oblivious to the US comparative creature.
|
4 hrs
maybe
your proportionate culpability must be taken into account
(not proportional, in this case)
Prorated does not fit here
(not proportional, in this case)
Prorated does not fit here
8 hrs
on a comparative basis
The claim against bank survives, but the negligence of the payor is reckoned into the damages calculation on a comparative basis, on the doctrine of "comparative negligence." It allows the trier of fact to divide responsibility between the parties according to specific proportions. It differs from "contributory negligence", as this term of art is understood in U.S. law, which does not ask what the percentage share of the fault is, but only whether there was _any_ negligent contribution by the aggrieved party, which if applied in pure form, "destroys" aggrieved party's claim (absolute defense). "Comparative" negligence doctrine, or a hybrid version of it, has displaced "contributory negligence" doctrine (which can be very harsh) in U.S. These are the two "doctrines" (so-named) that are employed when negligence (breach of duty) can be attributed to both sides.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs 26 mins (2004-04-26 18:39:14 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
But, from a translation standpoint, there is nothing misleading about \"pro-rata\" assignment of negligence, it seems to me.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs 53 mins (2004-04-26 19:06:21 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
\"...[T]he Supreme Court abolished the doctrine of contributory negligence in Michigan and replaced it with the doctrine of pure comparative negligence. The doctrine of pure comparative negligence does not allow one at fault to recover for one\'s own fault, since damages are reduced in proportion to the contribution of that person\'s negligence, whatever that proportion is.
Michigan Law And Practice, Copyright 2004, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis Group.
So \"proportional contribution\" or something like that also on target.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs 26 mins (2004-04-26 18:39:14 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
But, from a translation standpoint, there is nothing misleading about \"pro-rata\" assignment of negligence, it seems to me.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs 53 mins (2004-04-26 19:06:21 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
\"...[T]he Supreme Court abolished the doctrine of contributory negligence in Michigan and replaced it with the doctrine of pure comparative negligence. The doctrine of pure comparative negligence does not allow one at fault to recover for one\'s own fault, since damages are reduced in proportion to the contribution of that person\'s negligence, whatever that proportion is.
Michigan Law And Practice, Copyright 2004, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis Group.
So \"proportional contribution\" or something like that also on target.
Something went wrong...