Beware of Uncountable Nouns

Forum Legal: legal writing

Forum Legal

Wednesday, 18 May 2011

Legal English Synonyms?

Legal English is full of words and phrases which are very close in meaning, but which have some subtle differences in meaning or usages. These terms must therefore be treated with extreme care. Here are some examples.

1. Assign & transfer

Assign is mostly used in relation to intangible property, such as rights under a contract. For example, a typical assignment clause might state:

‘Neither Party may assign any or all of its rights and obligations under this contract without the prior written consent of the other Party.’

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/legal%20writing (1 of 19)3/23/2012 12:42:21 PM

Showing posts with label legal writing. Show all posts

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/


http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/05/legal-english-synonyms.html





In ordinary language it can mean to give a task, duty or benefit to someone. For example:

‘The task of cleaning the premises was assigned to John Smith.’

Transfer is generally used in relation to tangible property (such as land and other physical items). For example:

‘The goods shall be transferred to X’s premises at 15B Whiteley Road, Dartsley on 15 September 2011.’

2. Breach & infringement

Breach is used in relation to contractual violations. For example:

‘X is in breach of the payment obligation set out under clause 3.’

Infringement is used in relation to the violation of rights (particularly intellectual property rights). For example:

‘Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attaching to a trademark without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees.’

The word violation can be used in respect both of rights (particularly human rights) and contracts.

3. Landlord & tenant / lessor & lessee

Landlord and tenant are terms which can only be used in relation to the lease of real estate.

Lessor and lessee may also be used in relation to the lease of other types of property (e.g. machinery).

4. Obligation & liability



Obligation is generally used to refer to a specific duty under a contract or legal provision. For example:

‘X is obligated to deliver the goods to Y on December 5th, 2011’.

Liability generally refers to legal consequences. For example:

‘If Y fails to pay the invoices as they fall due, Y shall become liable to pay penalty interest on the outstanding amount at a rate of 10% per annum’.

In a nutshell, breach of an obligation may lead to legal liability.

5. Contract & agreement

Contract is generally used in relation to a specific written contract with legal effect (e.g. ‘we signed the contract today’) or to the branch of law that deals with contracts (contract law).

Agreement can be used as a direct synonym for contract in the sense of a specific written contract (e.g. ‘we signed the contract/agreement today’). However, it may also be used in a more general sense to refer to loose understandings or oral agreements which may or may not have legal effect. For instance:

‘We agreed to meet our colleagues at a restaurant for lunch.’

Posted by Rupert Haigh at 09:35 0 comments

Labels: Forum Legal, Legal English, Legal English Store, legal writing

Tuesday, 5 April 2011

How to Write


http://www.blogger.com/profile/06718562854004038573


http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/05/legal-english-synonyms.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/05/legal-english-synonyms.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/Forum%20Legal

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/Legal%20English

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/Legal%20English%20Store

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-to-write-numbers.html


Numbers

The general rule is that all numbers ten and below should be spelt and numbers 11 and above should be put in numerals. However, there are certain exceptions to this:

• If numbers recur through the text or are being used for calculations, then numerals should be used.

• If the number is approximate (e.g. ‘around six hundred years ago’) it should be spelled out.

• Very large numbers should generally be expressed without using rows of zeros where possible (e.g. $3.5 million instead of $3,500,000). In contracts, the use of both words and numbers is common in order to increase certainty. For example, ‘THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EUROS (€3,500)’.

• Percentages may be spelled out (twenty percent) or written as numbers (20%)

• Numbers that begin sentences should be spelled out.

Decimal points

In English writing, the decimal point is represented by a dot (.) and commas are used to break up long numbers. Commas cannot be used to represent a decimal point.

Therefore, the number ten thousand five hundred and fifty-three and three-quarters is written like this in English:

10,553.75

while in most Continental European countries, it is written like this:




10.553,75

When referring to sums of money, the following rules apply:

• When writing numerical sums, the currency sign goes before the sum (e.g. $100). Note that there is no gap between the sign and the figure that follows it.

• When spelling out numbers, the name of the currency is put after the number (e.g. ‘one hundred pounds sterling’).

The percentage sign (%) appears after the number to which it relates, and there is no gap between the sign and the number (e.g. 95%).

See www.legalenglishstore.com for more legal English materials.



Tuesday, 1 March 2011

When to Capitalise

Legal texts are littered with excessive capitalisation, which is: (1) grammatically incorrect; and (2) distracting for the reader.

Capital letters should only be used in the following situations:

(1) At the beginning of a sentence (e.g. ‘Thank you for your letter’).

(2) When writing proper names (e.g. London, Angela Merkel, Fleet Street).




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-to-write-numbers.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-to-write-numbers.html#comment-form




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/03/when-to-capitalise.html



(3) When writing names which derive from proper names (e.g. Christianity, Marxism).

(4) For certain abbreviations (e.g. USA, NATO, WTO).

(5) For a defined term in a legal document where the definition uses a capital letter (e.g. ‘Roggins plc, hereinafter referred to as “the Company”’).

The main difficulty that arises is that writers fail to distinguish clearly between (1) proper names and ordinary nouns; and (2) defined terms and ordinary nouns.

So, the next time you find yourself using capitals for such terms as ‘a group of companies’ or ‘the sales contract’, ask yourself whether the noun in question is either genuinely a proper name or a defined term. If the answer to both these questions is ‘no’, change to lowercase.

See www.legalenglishstore.com for more legal English material.



Wednesday, 2 February 2011

When to use a comma (,)

The use of commas in English legal writing is undoubtedly a problematic area. However, it is possible to identify eight main situations in which commas should be used.




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/03/when-to-capitalise.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/03/when-to-capitalise.html#comment-form




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/02/when-to-use-comma.html



1) To separate items in a list of more than two items. For example, ‘cars, trucks, vans, and tractors’. In this sentence, there is a comma after vans to show that the list contains four separate categories of items – cars, trucks, vans, tractors – and that vans and tractors do not make up a single category.

2) To separate coordinated main clauses. For example, ‘Cars should park here, and trucks should continue straight on’. In this sentence, the comma after here marks the separation between the different clauses in the sentence.

3) To mark the beginning and end of a sub-clause in a sentence. For example, ‘James, who is a corporate lawyer, led the seminar.’ Here, the commas after James and lawyer allow the writer to indicate to the reader in passing that James is a corporate lawyer, while at the same time placing the main emphasis on the fact that James led the seminar.

4) After certain kinds of introductory clause. For example, ‘Having finished my work, I left the office.’

5) After certain kinds of introductory words. When a sentence begins with a word which does not form part of the clause which follows it, a comma usually appears after this word. These are usually words – or combinations of two or three words – inserted by the author to indicate to the reader how the rest of the sentence is to be understood and how it relates to the previous sentence. For example, however, therefore, of course, nevertheless.

6) To separate a phrase or sub-clause from the main clause in order to avoid misunderstanding. For example:



I did not go to Paris yesterday, because the meeting was cancelled.

Here, the comma after yesterday makes it clear that the writer did not go to Paris, and the reason he or she did not go to Paris was that the meeting was cancelled. If the comma were to be removed, the sentence would be ambiguous – it would give the impression that the writer did go to Paris but that the reason for going to Paris was not that the meeting was cancelled:

I did not go to Paris yesterday because the meeting was cancelled. I went because I had urgent shopping to do!

7) Following words which introduce direct speech (e.g. said). For example, ‘He said, “my lawyer is a genius!”’

8) Between adjectives which each qualify a noun in the same way. For example, ‘a small, dark room’. Here, a comma is placed after small.

However, where the adjectives qualify the noun in different ways, or when one adjective qualifies another, no comma is used. For example, ‘a distinguished international lawyer’ or ‘a shiny blue suit’.

See www.legalenglishstore.com and www.forum-legal.com for more legal English content.


Labels: Forum Legal, Legal English, Legal English Store, legal writing, punctuation




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/02/when-to-use-comma.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/02/when-to-use-comma.html#comment-form




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/punctuation


Monday, 17 January 2011

The Origins of Legal English

Legal English reflects the mixture of languages which has produced the English language generally. However, it owes a particular debt to French and Latin.

Following the Norman invasion of England in 1066, French became the official language of England, although most ordinary people still spoke English. For a period of nearly 300 years, French was the language of legal proceedings, with the result that many words in current legal use have their roots in this period. These include property, estate, chattel, lease, executor and tenant. During this period, Latin was the language of formal records and statutes. However, since only the learned were fluent in Latin, it never became the language of legal pleading or debate.

Therefore, for several centuries following the Norman invasion, three languages were used in England. English remained the spoken language of the majority of the population, but almost all writing was done in French or Latin. English was not used in legal matters. In 1356, the Statute of Pleading was enacted (in French). It stated that all legal proceedings should be in English, but recorded in Latin.

As the printed word became more widely used, some writers made an effort to adopt words derived from Latin, in order to make their text more sophisticated. Some legal words taken from Latin in this way are adjacent, frustrate, inferior, legal, quiet and


http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/01/origins-of-legal-english.html



subscribe.

English was adopted for different kinds of legal documents at different times. Wills began to be written in English in about 1400. Statutes were written in Latin until about 1300, in French until 1485, in English and French for a few years, and in English alone from 1489.

The result of this history is that modern legal English contains an unusually high percentage of words and phrases derived from French and Latin as compared to ordinary English. Consider this simple force majeure clause:

Neither party shall be liable to the other for failure to perform or delay in the performance of its obligations caused by any circumstances beyond its reasonable control.

It contains 28 words, of which 17 are Old English, 7 Old French and 4 Latin. Of the Old English words, 9 are articles or prepositions (e.g. the, to, for, in, by). All the important legal terms (e.g. party, liable, obligations, reasonable, perform) are either Old French or Latin.

It follows that Latin-based terminology is essential to legal English. To use a computing analogy, we might say that where legal English is concerned, English is the ‘hardware’ which determines the grammatical construction of the sentences, but the Latin-based terminology is the ‘software’ which provides the legal meaning.

If I tried to draft the same clause relying solely on Germanic-based language, I would fail. The closest I can get is:

It’s not anyone’s fault if they



cannot do what they said they would do owing to something they could not do anything about.

Here, we have 23 words, of which 22 are from Old English and Old Norse (an old Scandinavian language) and only one (fault) is from Latin. But it is a painfully unsophisticated text, which lacks the legal precision of the first text and would not work at all without the use of the word fault.



Tuesday, 14 December 2010

Beware of Uncountable Nouns

Some nouns in English are uncountable. In other words, they are not used with a or an and do not have plural forms. This is typically the case with abstract or conceptual nouns, such as information, litigation, training, advice.

With the word ‘information’, for instance, you cannot write, ‘we have received an information’; nor can you write, ‘we have received some informations’. You can, however, write:

We have received some information.ORWe have received several pieces of information.

In other words, you can either use




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/01/origins-of-legal-english.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011/01/origins-of-legal-english.html#comment-form




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/12/beware-of-uncountable-nouns.html




the conceptual word in a general singular sense (‘some information’) or you can pluralise it using an auxiliary word (i.e. ‘pieces’ in ‘pieces of information’).

In legal contexts it is often possible to find an alternative countable word. For instance, while it is wrong to write, ‘the company has been involved in several litigations’, it would be perfectly acceptable to write that the company has been involved in several cases, claims, lawsuits etc.


Labels: Forum Legal, Legal English, Legal English Store, legal writing, uncountable nouns

Tuesday, 3 August 2010

Ambiguity: How to Avoid It

Ambiguity occurs when writing can be interpreted to mean more than one thing, and these things are in conflict with each other.

You can often get away with this in ordinary English if one meaning seems more likely than another. In legal English – especially in contract drafting – it can be disastrous. Anglo-American lawyers still take a literalist approach to construction – i.e. contract words are interpreted according to their literal meaning rather than according to the purpose and effect that can be presumed from the context. A slightly ambiguous piece of phrasing may end up costing thousands.




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/12/beware-of-uncountable-nouns.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/12/beware-of-uncountable-nouns.html#comment-form




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/uncountable%20nouns

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/08/ambiguity-how-to-avoid-it.html



There are many reasons why ambiguity occurs, but here are some of the main offenders:

(1) Use of a word which has more than one meaning in the context

Many English words have a number of different meanings depending on the context in which they are used. This is a natural feature of the language. Take, for example, the word following in these sentences:

Please refer to the following paragraph.ANDThere is a car following us.

It can be seen that the meaning of the word is very different in each sentence. However, this is not a problem because the context tells us which meaning applies. In the first sentence, the ‘following paragraph’ means the next paragraph. In the second sentence, ‘a car following’ means a car in pursuit (i.e. behind ‘us’).

Sometimes, however, the context does not clearly indicate which meaning applies. Consider this piece of legal verbiage:

Even if the company sells the product, if it does not usually sell this particular product in the usual course of business it may not be held liable.

The problem here is may, which either refers to a possibility (e.g. ‘I may go for a swim today, or I may not. It depends on how I feel later.’) or to an entitlement (e.g. ‘The purchaser may inspect the goods at the seller’s warehouse’). So, depending on how one reads this sentence, it either means that there is a possibility that the company will not be held liable or



that there is no entitlement to hold it liable. Neither of these options makes perfect sense and each is in conflict with the other.

The solution is to turn may not into cannot. Thus:

Even if the company sells the product, if it does not usually sell this particular product in the usual course of business it cannot be held liable.

(2) Unclear pronoun reference

The use of pronouns is an excellent way to avoid clumsy repetition of nouns, but this technique can result in confusion if carelessly handled. For example:

John drafted the contract for the client during the meeting itself and he then read it through carefully.

The problem here is that since we don’t know the gender of the client, the he referred to in the sentence may either be John or the client.

The key issue, obviously, is to ensure that it is clear which noun each pronoun is supposed to replace. If there is a possibility of doubt, use a proper noun instead. For example:

John drafted the contract for the client during the meeting itself and the client then read it through carefully.

(3) Poor punctuation

Punctuation can have a drastic impact on the meaning of a sentence. Consider these two pairs of sentences:

The judge said the accused was the most heinous villain



he had ever met.The judge, said the accused, was the most hei¬nous villain he had ever met.ANDWoman without her man would be a savage.Woman – without her, man would be a savage.

In the unpunctuated sentences above, the word order dictates the natural subject-object relationship. The judge and woman, respectively, are the subjects of the two sentences. The use of punctuation changes this around in both cases, thus creating radically different meanings.

The point to bear in mind is that punctuation is not just window-dressing used to makes sentences look tidy. In many cases it can dictate the meaning of the sentence – and should therefore be used with great care.

(4) Separation of verb phrase

The meaning of English sentences can in many cases be changed completely by altering the word order. For example:

My client has discussed your proposal to fill the drainage ditch with his partners.

This sentence probably means that the client has discussed with his partners the proposal to fill the drainage ditch – but it is capable of being interpreted to mean that the client is considering throwing his partners into the drainage ditch.

The ambiguity in this sentence is caused by the sep¬aration of the verb phrase ‘discussed with’ from its object (‘his partners’). By reuniting these parts of the whole



phrase the real meaning of the sentence becomes clear:

My client has discussed with his partners your proposal to fill the drainage ditch.

Ambiguity and vagueness

Ambiguity should be distinguished from mere vagueness. Vagueness arises when the language used is imprecise or non-committal, and may sometimes be intentional (for example, in order to avoid giving a specific commitment on a particular issue). Here is an example:

We must do lunch sometime.

Rupert Haigh

See www.legalenglishstore.com and www.forum-legal.com for more legal English content.


Labels: contract drafting, Forum Legal, Legal English, legal writing

Sunday, 18 July 2010

'In accordance with' or 'according to': which to use?

In accordance with? According to? These very similar phrases appear with almost unbelievable frequency in legal texts, and in such a wide variety




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/08/ambiguity-how-to-avoid-it.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/08/ambiguity-how-to-avoid-it.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/contract%20drafting



http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-accordance-with-or-according-to.html





of contexts that it is very hard to tell them apart. However, they do have slightly different meanings - and sometimes these differences are of crucial importance.

In a nutshell, ‘in accordance with’ is used to indicate that the matter referred to has mandatory effect. It means roughly the same as ‘in compliance with’. For instance:

The work must be carried out in accordance with the client’s specific instructions.

Whereas ‘according to’ generally indicates reportage. It tells the reader that the matter referred to is derived or reported from a certain source. For instance:

According to my lawyer, I could claim substantial damages for this infringement.

In case this explanation is not entirely clear, consider the following sentences:

According to the weather forecast it will rain tomorrow.ORIn accordance with the weather forecast it will rain tomorrow.

The first of these sentences is correct – it is reportage that simply tells us what the



weather forecast said. But the second – ‘in accordance with the weather forecast’ – indicates that the weather forecast actually governs the weather, which is clearly not the case.

Confusion may arise in situations in which both expressions can be used, but with different emphasis. Compare:

Rent shall be paid in accordance with paragraph 7 of the lease agreement.andRent shall be paid according to paragraph 7 of the lease agreement.

The difference between these sentences is that the first tells us that paragraph 7 governs the way in which rent is paid, while the second tells us where to find the obligation to pay rent (i.e. in paragraph 7).


Labels: contract drafting, Forum Legal, Legal English, legal writing

Newer Posts Home

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom) Followers

Blog Archive

● ▼ 2011 (6) ❍ • August (1)




http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-accordance-with-or-according-to.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-accordance-with-or-according-to.html#comment-form

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/contract%20drafting



http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search/label/legal%20writing?max-results=20


http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2011-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2012-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=6

http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/2011_08_01_archive.html


❍ ▼ May (1) ■ Legal English Synonyms?

❍ • April (1) ❍ • March (1) ❍ • February (1) ❍ • January (1)

● • 2010 (7)

About Me

Rupert Haigh

View my complete profile

Simple template. Powered by Blogger.








http://forum-legal.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2010-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2011-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=7




http://www.blogger.com/

Documents

Beware of Uncountable Nouns