Adrian MM. (X) Dec 21, 2013:

Omissions from notarised deeds or translations Yes. No problem leaving out the second part of the phrase if the translation is not itself for notarisation a.k.a. notarial attestation, the approx. charging order nisi didn't need autorisation du juge/the judge's leave and it has not been wrongly registered.

claude-andrew (asker) Dec 21, 2013:

@Tim Thanks for that observation Tim. Indeed, half of the deed consists of copy pastings of the various relevant acts.
It was an urgent job and in the end that's just what I did: simply "represented by".
Thanks to everybody for your help.

Tim Webb Dec 21, 2013:

Copy paste error I bet the notary has copied and pasted the lawyer's details from the papers that were submitted to the Juge de l'Exécution. There is no reason why a firm of lawyers would need a "postulant" in a notarial deed (postulation is a procedure found only in the TGI).
Indeed, in the TGI action, Maître XX would have represented his firm (SELARL X) AND the bank's lawyers, who must be members of the bar of a different TGI.

You will not be taking any risks if you ignore "postulant par le ministère de" and just use "represented by" (or "represented by and through" if you want to emulate the unnecessary duplication).

Copy/paste errors are legion in notarial deeds.

claude-andrew (asker) Dec 20, 2013:

@Tim Yes, he is a member of the SELARL. Thanks for your comment.

Tim Webb Dec 20, 2013:

More context Is Maître X*** a member of the SELARL? If so, I think just "represented by Maître X***" will be sufficient, as he is just representing the company to sign a deed and "postulant" (a lawyer who acts as a local representative, in a way, for the lawyer of a different Bar) is irrelevant