Courses for Legal Translators / Interpreters

 THE  NETHERLANDS

 7th and 8th June, 2013

Two-day package: http://www.ktv-kennisnet.nl/course.php?id=125
Company law: http://www.ktv-kennisnet.nl/course.php?id=129
Contract law: http://www.ktv-kennisnet.nl/course.php?id=127

LONDON

Weekend CPD Law Courses: June, 2013 (new discounts for ITI members)

 English Law for Legal Translators & Interpreters: One-day CPD Courses at the St Giles Hotel in the West End of London, next to Tottenham Court Road tube station. Some Lexacom courses are also suitable for civil code lawyers provided they have the requisite level of English.

The courses are presented by David Hutchins, Solicitor of the Senior Courts of England & Wales: Tel: 07885 722 529

AS A TASTER, listen to a recording of David Hutchins’ live broadcast on a local London radio station on the basics of Contract Law: http://www.colourfulradio.com/presenter/breakfast/

CLICK on Listen Again, select “Bonsu and Juju”, and scroll down to 0900 hrs on 26th March, 2013

 UPCOMING COURSES

Saturday, 1st June, 2013: “Family Law”
Family Law, Divorce, & Children: Basic Principles & Terminology

Sunday, 2nd June, 2013: “Criminal Law”
Criminal Law & Procedure for Legal Interpreters & Translators

Saturday, 15th June, 2013: “Courts, Judges, Lawyers, and Procedure” (English Legal System)
The Civil & Criminal Courts, Judges and Procedure, Solicitors & Barristers **** SEE BELOW FOR MORE DETAILS OF COURSE

Sunday, 16th June, 2013: “Wills, Probate, & Powers of Attorney”
Wills, Probate, & Powers of Attorney: Language and Terminology

Saturday, 29th June, 2013: “Employment Law”
Employment Contracts, Discrimination & Dismissal: Law & Terminology

Sunday, 30th June, 2012: “Intellectual Property & Land Law”
The Law & Terminology of Property & Intellectual Property

VENUE: St Giles Hotel, Bedford Avenue, London WC1B 3GH, UK, Tel.: +(44)0 20 7300 3052 (Conference Manager: Ms Kerry Hughes).
 

ITI & IOL members can claim CPD points (six hours per course).

These are intensive interactive One-Day Courses with a maximum of 18 Participants.

No other training, workshop or seminar provider offers this level of coverage in a one-day course.

Course notes and other materials will be distributed by email to participants approximately one week in advance. Lexacom does not provide hard copies. The courses are in English and are aimed at translators, of whatever nationality, who translate legal documents FROM or INTO English, and legal interpreters who work with English. No knowledge of English Law is required, so the courses are also suitable for beginners in the legal field.

Participants will receive a signed certificate of attendance at the end of the course.

COURSE FEES: The fee for each course is £150 per person (ITI: £125) (excluding VAT @ 20%) and that includes an excellent two-course lunch at a local restaurant plus the usual refreshments throughout the day (constant mineral water and three servings of tea / coffee). Participants based and working outside UK may not be liable to UK VAT.

DISCOUNTS: The course fee for all former Lexacom participants will be £125, and £110 for ITI members on booking a second and every subsequent course in this series.

If you book (and pay for) four or five courses in this series, at the same time, a total discount of £40 (ITI: £50) per course is offered. So, four courses will cost £440 (ITI: £400) (plus VAT if applicable).

If you book (and pay for) all six courses in this series, at the same time, a total discount of £50 (ITI: £60) per course is offered. So, six courses will cost £600 (ITI: £540) (plus VAT if applicable).

NOTE: These discounts are offered only to single participants. Discounts for a block booking (two or more participants on one or more courses) are negotiable.

During 2011 and 2012, 70% of Lexacom participants attended more than one course. See the numerous testimonials

FIF PL for French residents
Reimbursement of all or part of the course fee from FIF PL may be possible for French residents: an application may need to be made well in advance of the course date but see their website:

http://www.fifpl.fr/pages/consulter.php?naf_id=43

Email David Hutchins (Solicitor) on dhutch3694@aol.com for the detailed course programme(s) and / or the booking procedure, terms and conditions. No booking is contractually effective until the course fee has been paid, so participants are strongly advised not to incur travel, accommodation or other expenses before their booking is secured.

He can also advise regarding the content and level of the courses and on course selection.

*** “Contract & Civil Liability”
What is the difference between a ‘lease’ and a ‘lease agreement’? What are ‘without prejudice’ negotiations? How did the Woolf reforms change the use of the word ‘pleadings’? Is there a difference between ‘plaintiff’ and ‘claimant’?
This course covers a lot more than just contracts: it also includes a large amount of Common Law terminology and concepts which do not relate solely to contracts, or to contracts at all. Civil liability covers liability under tort (eg accident claims) as well as liability for breach of contract. The rules regarding evidence, causation, damages, mitigation of loss are all common to both. In addition there are several other essential topics such as agency, domicile, contempt of court, the new civil litigation terminology (following Lord Woolf’s changes in 1999) and some basic civil litigation procedure.

**** “Courts, Judges, Lawyers, and Procedure” (English Legal System)
This is the course which should be of most general relevance to both translators and interpreters. Court interpreters need a good basic knowledge of the court structure, how the system works, and who are the main players. Any translator of commercial contracts, even if he / she never goes near a court, is also likely to have some contact with the terminology and legal concepts relating to litigation and the basic court references. How can you be a legal translator or legal interpreter on a regular basis if you don’t fully understand the system within which you are working…..if you don’t, for example, know the difference between a magistrate and a judge, a court and a tribunal, a hearing and a trial, or a judgment and an order?

 

 

Why is Common Law important?

Many cases which come before the English High Court and Court of Appeal involving, for example, large corporate mergers and acquisitions are decided on a basic Common Law point such as the absence of "consideration" or whether "time is of the essence" in contractual disputes, or whether a remedy should be ordered under the rules of Equity.

Example

EXAMPLE: The word "DOMICILE", under English Law, has a specific legal meaning. It is a Common Law concept.
"Domicile" does NOT mean "address" or "residence" or "home" or "nationality".

EXAMPLE: The contract wording ".......time to be of the essence of the contract" also has a specific legal significance which the Translator needs to be aware of. To translate as the equivalent of " this time limit is an important term of the contract" is NOT accurate.

LANGUAGE EXAMPLE: "JURISPRUDENCE" is NOT the same as "case law" or "precedent".

LANGUAGE EXAMPLE: "DAMAGE" or "DAMAGES"? What's the difference? "Damages" is NOT the plural of "Damage".

LANGUAGE EXAMPLE: "EVIDENCE" and "PROOF". Lawyers refer to the "evidence". The layman talks about the "proof". What's the difference?

WITHOUT PREJUDICE or SUBJECT TO CONTRACT: What's the difference? A prominent firm of London estate agents negotiated a new shop lease with a tenant by correspondence and agreed terms "without prejudice".

Before the new lease was signed they decided to add a new condition which the tenant refused to accept. They hadn't realised that the "agreement" was already legally binding and could not be changed. They had intended the negotiations to be "subject to contract" but had got it wrong. They had been professionally negligent and were liable in damages to the landlord, their client.

Pena v Dale {2003} All ER {D} 416 MAR
High Court, Chancery Division

The Claimant alleged he was entitled to enforce an agreement (oral but confirmed by letter) that gave him an option to acquire shares in a company. The Defendants contested his claim, saying that, if there was an agreement, it was not enforceable due to certain conditions. The Court had to decide

a) whether an enforceable agreement (contract) existed

b) whether the Common Law remedy of damages was sufficient or whether to make an order for "Specific Performance", a remedy under Equity to enforce a transfer of the shares.

NOTE: Since April 1999 a civil action is now started by the "Claimant". The term "Plaintiff" is no longer correct. However, Defendants are still Defendants.