sendo controvertido o invocado por cada uma das partes em tais processos;

17:29 Jul 21, 2015 

Sorry to rain on your parade Mario, but 'whereas' as a preamble is pure legal jargon.

17:25 Jul 21, 2015 

I see you think like me. Language first, legalese second! I won't give up my "campaign". I think legalese sucks and splutters the language.

15:24 Jul 21, 2015 

14:29 Jul 21, 2015 

Thanks a lot to everyone for contributing!
Although I would like to keep the mumbo-jumbo factor intact, I just can't help myself.... I'm going for something that, at least, sounds like it makes sense to me, so I am going to use Mario's suggestion.

20:09 Jul 20, 2015 

I'm not a lawyer. I write for people to understand. I often correct legalese and convert it to an understandable text, and no one will convince me otherwise. I do try to use the legalese jargon as much as possible, but not the ornaments and awkwardness whatsoever.
By the way, in this case, I don't think there has been denial, yet. Controversy is one step before denial.

20:05 Jul 20, 2015 

One policy is to disentangle the (il-)legal obscurities so they make sense in the English and enable native Portuguese (or Spanish) speakers to understand the translation, even if the original wording is beyond them. Hence the compliment: 'As a native ES/PO etc. speaker, I could understand your English translation, but not the Portuguese/Spanish/German etc, source text'.

19:56 Jul 20, 2015 

One of the things the legalese writers always keep in mind is finding a way to make sure the lay person will NOT understand a word they write.

18:28 Jul 20, 2015 

12. - (1) The revocation by these Regulations of a provision previously revoked subject to savings does not affect the continued operation of those savings.

(2) The revocation by these Regulations of a saving on the previous revocation of a provision does not affect the operation of the saving in so far as it is not specifically reproduced in these Regulations but remains capable of having effect.'

(From Schedule 1 to other Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations)

18:26 Jul 20, 2015 

Yeah but it's legal English, so the more awkward the better. Otherwise yer average layperson might understand it, and we can't be having that, no sir.

18:08 Jul 20, 2015 

Back to the topic, I think all suggestions above are correct. The issue here, IMO, is the construction in English, which sounds quite awkward if kept in the same order as in PT. That's why I suggested a different order of the elements of the sentence, to sound better in EN, though the terms of the other suggestions may be more adequate.

17:01 Jul 20, 2015 

Então Mario, não pude deixar passar. :)

16:56 Jul 20, 2015 

é usar "por cada" em um documento formal. Cacófato comum, mas pouco observado.

15:52 Jul 20, 2015 

Hi Nick, the same here and also this term 'por cada' which does not sound good.