Eliza Hall Apr 28, 2021:

@AllegroTrans "acte de procédure" In my "Agree" comment on your post, my one quibble was that "process" should be translated as "ordonnances du tribunal"; you asked if "actes de procédure" worked as a generic term that encompassed this type of documents.

It does encompass them, but it is too broad because it encompasses EVERYTHING: "Un acte de procédure est un ensemble d’actes ou de procédures à accomplir par les parties, leurs représentants, les juges ou les auxiliaires de justice dans la cadre d’une action en justice." https://infonet.fr/lexique/definitions/acte-de-procedure/

"Process" refers only to (1) legal documents that (2) are filed with or issued by the court and (3) need to be served upon someone. For instance, discovery documents--interrogatories, etc.--have to be served, but they are drafted by the parties and not filed with the court, so they don't meet requirement (2) above. A US lawyer or court would never use the word "process" to refer to discovery documents. That word refers to a very specific subset of documents.

So "actes de procédure" isn't straight-up WRONG, but it's too broad. I prefer the narrower and clearer "ordonnances du tribunal."

Eliza Hall Apr 28, 2021:

@AllegroTrans I should have clarified: the US legal system operates differently than *any* FR-speaking legal system. And so does the England/Wales, etc. system. Most English-speaking jurisdictions have a common-law legal system, and every FR-speaking jurisdiction of which I'm aware has a civil-law system. Louisiana even has a civil-law system for its state law, due to the French influence in its history, and a common-law system for its federal law because it's in the US.

So the point remains true regardless of which jurisdictions we're talking about. As for which EN-speaking jurisdiction the letter rogatory issued from, the terminology and phrasing suggest that it came from the US. It just sounds like what a US court would say (letters rogatory are issued by courts).

But the clincher is that these witnesses are being ordered to produce "all relevant... documents" in litigation to which they are not parties. In the UK, document production is more limited than in the US; generally documents have to be identified individually or by a clear class ("all statements for your current account with X bank"). Mere relevance isn't enough.

AllegroTrans Apr 27, 2021:

Eliza The FR legal system doesn't operate the same way as the US system - true of course but asker says this is from a lettre rogatoire, so it's not necesarily the US and France that are involved. Could be GB and Belgium, New Zealand and Switzerland or just about any combination of En-speaking and Fr-speaking jurisdictions. Asker has not told us.

François Tardif Apr 27, 2021:

Maybe a pair of commas would have helped! Thanks Eliza, now I understand! Personally, I do think that had it been for the presence of punctuation, I would have understood more rapidly. The sentence would have been clearer to me if it had been written as follows: [with commas surrounding “upon each witness”]

“This Court also respectfully requests that all relevant and non-privileged documentary evidence requested herein be produced by each witness within twenty-eight days of the service, upon each witness, of the process to be issued.”

D’accord aussi avec la proposition de traduction de Germaine!

Eliza Hall Apr 27, 2021:

Subpoena translation The FR legal system doesn't operate the same way as the US system, obviously, especially when it comes to discovery (gathering of evidence) in civil cases, so some terms are harder to translate. Subpoena, which is the type of process implicitly referred to in Christian's original text, is one of those terms.

When a US text is talking about subpoenas served upon witnesses in a civil case, it means one of two things:

1. The witness is being ordered to testify in a deposition (subpoena ad testificandum); or
2. The witness is being ordered to locate and hand over copies of documents in the witness's possession (subpoena duces tecum).

Either way, a subpoena is a court order that the witness must comply with.

If a witness is ordered to appear for a deposition, you could use the normal FR term for subpoena: assignation à comparaître (or assigner, if it's a verb: "the witness was subpoenaed...").

If they're ordered to produce documents, there's no perfect FR term. You generally need an explanatory translation: Ordonner la production de documents, exiger la production de documents, ordonnance du tribunal... etc.

Eliza Hall Apr 27, 2021:

@Ph-B You said: "Les ex. qu'on trouve en googlant "service of process to be issued"parlent des défendeurs, comme vous le dites, mais pas des témoins."

Your question on that point was already answered below. Yesterday I explained, with links to confirm it, that where process is being served on witnesses, what's being served is a subpoena (a court order directing the witness to do something--either produce documents, or testify in a deposition).

In the text Christian posted, the court says that the witnesses will need to produce documents, so that's the type of subpoena being discussed. If you want more vocab, in US law the full name of a subpoena ordering a witness to produce documents is "subpoena duces tecum," as opposed to a "subpoena ad testificandum," which orders the witness to testify.

The "service to be issued" examples you found on Google, which referred to service upon defendants, were most likely service of original process--in other words, service of the complaint and summons. You can check the google links you found to confirm that.

Eliza Hall Apr 27, 2021:

@ AllegroTrans: correct Hello, just posting to confirm (for Ph-B's benefit primarily, but also for Dominique, who would understand what it means if he'd read my posts) that you're correct that:

1. It's the court/tribunal that "issues" the process.

2. That the process to be issued is some sort of document to be délivré/émis by the court ("process" can be a number of different types of legal documents).

3. That the witnesses will be served with those documents (that's the service of process/process to be served).

AllegroTrans Apr 27, 2021:

Where some of you are going astray "procès" and "process" are (nearly always) false friends

AllegroTrans Apr 27, 2021:

Dominique It means: ....all relevant and non-privileged documentary evidence requested must be produced *by each witness*within 28 days* of that witness being served* with forthcoming process (i.e. documents issued by a court or judicial authority)

AllegroTrans Apr 27, 2021:

issued = délivré/émis (par le tribunal/pouvoir judicial)

Dominique Stiver Apr 27, 2021:

this question was a totally justified question! I'm still wondering what it actually means.

ph-b (X) Apr 27, 2021:

Germaine, pour en finir [to issue] service of process (to be issued] en tant que tel ne me poserait aucun problème (on trouve suffisamment d'ex. fiables) si la fameuse « phrase » ne mentionnait pas « chaque witness ». Les ex. qu'on trouve en googlant "service of process to be issued"parlent des défendeurs, comme vous le dites, mais pas des témoins. Il y a d'autres sens (cf. la citation Termium) qui correspondent à la syntaxe de la phrase et une autre lecture est possible sur la base du texte présenté. Et je viens de voir la note d'Eliza, dont le ton qu'elle adopte au début me dispenserait d'y répondre, sauf pour lui faire remarquer que le sens qu'elle donne à cette question n'était peut-être pas celui qu'elle retient. Encore une question de nuance, j'imagine.

Eliza Hall Apr 27, 2021:

@Ph-B Your question to AllegroTrans helps illustrate why you are not translating this correctly: because you don't understand what the original EN text means. You asked, "Dans le texte source, issued se rapporte-t-il à service ou bien à process ?"

"Issued" cannot refer to "service." Service means signification: the act of placing the legal papers at issue (complaint, subpoena, etc.) in the hands of the recipient, or in their mailbox, or whatever place the law recognizes as constituting effective service. Service is not something that can be "issued." It is made, or effected, or completed.

"Issued" in this context refers to process. The court issues process. Here's how it works:

1. The court issues process (in this case, subpoenas). Then,
2. The process (subpoenas) are served on the witnesses. Then,
3. The witnesses have 28 days after service to provide the documents requested in the subpoenas.

If this is still unclear, re-read my April 26 post in this discussion and the links I included there.

Germaine Apr 27, 2021:

ph-b Syntaxe et syntagme:
the service / upon each witness / of the process to be issued =
the service of the process to be issued upon each witness

What is to be issued? the service of process
Issued to whom? upon each witness

Le syntagme est "service of (the) process" et non "issue of process". D'autant que ce ne sont pas les témoins qui sont avisés qu'une poursuite est intentée, mais plutôt les défendeurs.

ph-b (X) Apr 27, 2021:

AllegroTrans, Dans le texte source, issued se rapporte-t-il à service ou bien à process ? S'agit-il de service (of process) to be issued, donc to issue service (of process) ? Ou bien de process to be issued, donc to issue process ? Termium a une réponse pour la deuxième possibilité.

ph-b (X) Apr 27, 2021:

Eliza, Il semble utile de vous rappeler une fois de plus qu'avant de nous inonder de vos disagree, il faut lire le texte attentivement pour en saisir les nuances et pouvoir les traduire. Bataille perdue d'avance ? Quoi qu'il en soit, l'expression utilisée est issue process, et non pas process seul, dont vous trouverez la traduction ici : https://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/mdd/inde... PS C'est « ph-b ». Encore une nuance qui vous échapperait ?

AllegroTrans Apr 27, 2021:

Service of process = signification des actes de procédure

Eliza Hall Apr 26, 2021:

@Ph-B I think you might have missed a nuance of EN legalese. The reason I posted that definition of process is because some posters don't seem to understand who issues process.

It's not a litigant (so the translation can't be "entamer une procédure"). It's a court. See s. 34.02 here:

"The Municipal Court shall have the power to issue any and all necessary process... which process includes warrants of arrest, search warrants, bench warrants, citations, summonses, subpoenas, and other necessary process."
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/raton/latest/raton_nm/...

In the context of Christian's text, which says witnesses are being ordered to provide documents, the type of process that the court is issuing must be a subpoena, because a subpoena is how witnesses are compelled to provide documents:

"A Subpoena Duces Tecum (meaning ‘subpoena for production of evidence’) is a court order requiring the person subpoenaed to produce books, documents or other records under his or her control at a specified time/place in a court hearing or a deposition...."
https://chancellor.berkeley.edu/are-there-different-types-su...

Tony M Apr 26, 2021:

@ François Our comments were in fact intended to counter the ill-advised remark that there is « Rien à comprendre ... la phrase tient pas » which is patently not true here.

ph-b (X) Apr 26, 2021:

Eliza, Il semble utile de vous rappeler une fois de plus qu'avant de coller des disagree partout, il faut lire le texte attentivement pour en saisir les nuances et pouvoir les traduire. Bataille perdue d'avance ? Quoi qu'il en soit, l'expression utilisée est issue process, et non pas process seul, dont vous trouverez la traduction ici : https://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/mdd/inde...

Eliza Hall Apr 26, 2021:

Perfectly clear phrase In legalese, it's perfectly clear. BTW here's what "process" means in this context:

"In civil and criminal proceedings, any means used by a court to acquire or exercise its jurisdiction over a person or over specific property. A summons or summons and complaint; sometimes, a writ." https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Process

Germaine's proposed translation in this discussion is best.

François Tardif Apr 26, 2021:

Tony and Allegro The phrase in question is not that perfectly clear syntactically to a francophone (and maybe not for an English speaker either). In fact, "to be issued" would be better placed immediately after "service", and would be that more understandable, in a syntactical sense, if formulated as follows:

“…be produced by each witness within twenty-eight days of the service to be issued upon each witness of the process.”

Moreover, French can easily keep only one "each witness" where English repeats it twice.

AllegroTrans Apr 26, 2021:

I agree with Tony the sentence makes perfect sense. We need to know which part of it is the problem and asker should squash this question and not put "phrase" but the actual words (maximum 10)

Renate Radziwill-Rall Apr 26, 2021:

Christian Tu ne devrais pas mettre "phrase" en haut en première ligne. Cela ne sert pas au glossaire.

Tony M Apr 26, 2021:

@ Asker The phrase is perfectly correct and not especially tricky to understand; which is the bit that doesn't seem to make sense to you?

Germaine Apr 26, 2021:

Christian, Je lis "[Ce tribunal][Cette cour] demande respectueusement que toutes les preuves documentaires pertinentes non confidentielles requises aux présentes soit produites par chacun des témoins dans les 28 jours de la signification qui leur sera faite de la procédure."

Renate Radziwill-Rall Apr 26, 2021:

Rien à comprendre la phrase ne tient pas. Demander le client