Bon pour gage

13:55 Jun 26, 2016 

There are some notes about it on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lu_et_approuvé . Simplifications of French law can take decades to be implemented on the ground, as some people cling to what have become empty formalities, as if the sky would crash down around them if they didn't continue. Something similar is happening around the 'justificatif de domicile', also officially abolished as a formal requirement in general. It's a curious phenomenon: even when the government simplifies administrative procedures, there is massive resistance to such simplification. In most other countries, it's the opposite. France is also the only country I know of where people can’t just provide a bank account number but have to provide an official document from their bank, a RIB. The rest of the world seems to function very well without these layers of formality.

13:43 Jun 26, 2016 

Thanks for that, Tom. You've taught me something there. Be that as it may, my French-French legal dictionaries, inc. lexique de termes juridiques, Dalloz, say that - before a French law of the 12 July 1980 - Bon pour was added in handwriting 1. on *unilateral* undertakings like a promesse, gage or a devis http://www.freelance-info.fr/forum/freelance_10322.html and 2. to stop any alteration of a sum of money paid over. So we are sure that this gage is 1. French vs. Cameroon etc. and 2. postdates 1980?. PS I add - to English-drafted tenancies of UK premises - 'Good as deposit' where an incoming tenant pays nothing but takes over and is unilaterally assigned the deposit of an outgoing tenant who has waived such.

13:24 Jun 26, 2016 

I couldn't agree more with you, Thomas. This comes at the end after all details, terms and conditions have been set out. The signature definitely means the signatory agrees to said T&C.

11:27 Jun 26, 2016 

If the contract is signed under French law, such 'fluff' has no legal meaning, as it is the signature that makes the contract valid, not such 'legal theatre' that refers to nothing whatsoever in the law or case law. They could just as well ask the signing party to bow in the general direction of the Eiffel Tower with a Code civil in his hands. Google "lu et approuvé" and you'll find authoritative sources for this. I make a point of never writing these ‘fluff words’ in contracts I sign because they add no legal meaning and are born out of an obsession with empty formality. But your translation of the fluff looks fine to me. As long as it remains fluff and does not introduce new conditions, it's fine.