diviser contre son auteur

English translation: [A judicial admission...] cannot be used only in part against its author

16:38 Oct 14, 2019
French to English translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law (general)
French term or phrase: diviser contre son auteur
From article 1383-2 of the French Code Civil dealing with legal admissions (in court):

« L’aveu judiciaire est la déclaration que fait en justice la partie ou son représentant spécialement mandaté.
Il fait foi contre celui qui l’a fait.
Il ne peut être divisé contre son auteur.
Il est irrévocable, sauf en cas d’erreur de fait. »

(https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do;jsessionid=6D23...

The official English translation of the Civil Code (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/content/download/1950/13681/v... does not contain an article 1383-2. Presumably an out-of-date version.

This translation does contain it: https://www.trans-lex.org/601101/_/french-civil-code-2016/ . I don't know who these people are. They translate as:

"It may not be divided against its author."

I don't know what that means. Does this make sense to anyone?
Mpoma
United Kingdom
Local time: 08:45
English translation:[A judicial admission...] cannot be used only in part against its author
Explanation:
For background, an aveu judiciaire isn't called a "confession" in EN. That word is reserved for criminal matters (confessing to a murder, etc.). An aveu judiciaire can be a criminal matter, civil matter, family-court matter, etc. -- any legal issue that could possibly end up in court. In EN it is called a "judicial admission":
https://definitions.uslegal.com/j/judicial-admission/

The reference SafeTex posted is legit and useful, but his translation is meaningless. What that reference explains is that in FR law, when a party makes a judicial admission, in order for the judge to use that admission as the basis for deciding against the person who made the admission, the judge has to take the admission in its entirety, as a whole. They can't just take one part of it.

So (overly simplistic example) if someone admitted on the witness stand, "Yes, I illegally dumped my company's toxic chemicals in the Potomac River," but the trial is about illegally dumping chemicals in the Charles River, you can't use the first part of the admission as proof that the defendant dumped chemicals in the Charles River. You have to look at the entire admission -- and it's about a different river, so it's not proof that he dumped chemicals in the Charles River.

In EN legalese we talk a lot about things being used "in whole or in part." That actually means something that an EN lawyer/paralegal/other person likely to be reading this text would understand. So it works here: a judicial admission cannot be used only in part against its author. We understand that to mean that if you want to use it at all, you have to use the whole thing.







--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2019-10-14 18:31:18 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

PS re your comment on SafeTex's suggestion: Yes, that's exactly what "contre son auteur" means: against the person who said it; as evidence against him; to the detriment of his case. And you can just translate it straightforwardly as "against its author."

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2019-10-15 15:56:55 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

To address Adrian's totally misplaced concerns, I will make life easy by pasting the key points from the link that I already provided:

"Judicial admission means an admission made by a party in a judicial proceeding... or a failure to officially dispute an assertion. Judicial admissions must be in writing except when they are part of the court record" (i.e., when they're said in testimony, so they appear on the transcript). https://definitions.uslegal.com/j/judicial-admission/

So, Adrian:
(1) no, it has nothing to do with judges admitting evidence;

(2) yes, it's an in-court admission, as in the FR;

(3) no, it has nothing to do with judicial notice (https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1065; and

"3(b)" (your numbering system) no, the word "author" doesn't imply that the admission is written rather than oral. For instance, a singer is the "author" of a copyrighted sound recording; see also definition 2a here: AUTHOR - "one that originates or creates something: source" (author of software; author of a film; author of a crime).
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/author
Selected response from:

Eliza Hall
United States
Local time: 04:45
Grading comment
Selected automatically based on peer agreement.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
4 +4[A judicial admission...] cannot be used only in part against its author
Eliza Hall
3 +2use selectively in part (a formal - civil - admission) against its maker
Adrian MM.
2 -3the accused's judicial confession is indivisible
SafeTex
Summary of reference entries provided
Explanation
SafeTex

  

Answers


31 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 2/5Answerer confidence 2/5 peer agreement (net): -3
the accused's judicial confession is indivisible


Explanation:
Please see my reference entry reproduced below.
My suggestion is perhaps a starting point


    Reference: http://cours-de-droit.net/les-preuves-parfaites-ecrit-aveu-j...
SafeTex
France
Local time: 09:45
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 87
Notes to answerer
Asker: Thanks, useful. I suppose maybe an idea of "detrimental to its author" is contained in the phrase "contre son auteur"...


Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
disagree  Eliza Hall: That doesn't make sense/mean much of anything to an EN reader, and also doesn't work grammatically in the text.
1 hr

disagree  AllegroTrans: I have to agree with Eliza and even say this is nonsense
3 hrs

disagree  Daryo: the reference is a very good one, but you can't just create your own legal terms in EN - legalese doesn't work that way.
14 hrs
  -> I said this was just a starting point and gave it a low level of certainty.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

2 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5 peer agreement (net): +2
diviser (un ’aveu judiciaire) contre son auteur
use selectively in part (a formal - civil - admission) against its maker


Explanation:
'Il ne peut être divisé contre son auteur.' - I suggest: it is non-severable - so used selectively - in part only - as an *aveu partiel* - against its maker.

A confession can be one made in court, so in the 'dock'.

On the other hand (per contra), a formal admission in a civil context in ENG Common Law countries, as I once previously explained elsewhere on this site - is one made in pleadings, an affidavit or in court, namely by the 'maker of the declaration'.

An informal one is made out of court, such as a suspect on his or her doorstep spontaneously admitting to a police officer an offence the latter had even been unaware of 'It's a fair cop, Guv. I nicked that Rolls Royce'. 'What Rolls Royce?'.



I'm afraid I can't call up the asker's and SafeTex's weblinks as they keep telling me I'm using an ad blocker, when I'm not.



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2019-10-14 18:46:17 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

a confession in a *criminal* context vs. admission in a civil one.

Example sentence(s):
  • SAfr & E&W: Informal admissions, which are usually made out of court, must be distinguished from formal admissions, made in the pleadings or in court. Formal admissions are binding on the maker, & generally made in order to reduce the number of issues.
  • la Cour d'appel qui, ...., retient que la déclaration du défendeur, reconnaissant avoir reçu et remboursé un prêt de 600 francs, constitue un *aveu partiel* rendant inutile la preuve par écrit de l'emprunt litigieux.

    Reference: http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/pretrial/witn...
    Reference: http://juricaf.org/arret/FRANCE-COURDECASSATION-19780117-761...
Adrian MM.
Austria
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 359

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  SafeTex: I prefer this with "selectively" which has the idea of choosing the parts
5 mins
  -> Thanks, but it does look like I have plagiarised - nicked, cribbed and lifted - Eliza's answer that I, as an older and slower thinker, in fact never saw until after having posted mine.

agree  Daryo
12 hrs
  -> Hvala lepo, merci and thanks.

neutral  Eliza Hall: Why add “selectively” when (a) there’s no such word in the original, (b) you can convey the meaning without it, and (c) “selectively” is confusing in that it suggests you might be able to use part of the admission if you did so non-selectively?
18 hrs
  -> (a) diviser in this context subsumes an active selection (b) others deem the meaning better conveyed with it and (c) no such non-selective inference is implicit or explicit.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +4
[A judicial admission...] cannot be used only in part against its author


Explanation:
For background, an aveu judiciaire isn't called a "confession" in EN. That word is reserved for criminal matters (confessing to a murder, etc.). An aveu judiciaire can be a criminal matter, civil matter, family-court matter, etc. -- any legal issue that could possibly end up in court. In EN it is called a "judicial admission":
https://definitions.uslegal.com/j/judicial-admission/

The reference SafeTex posted is legit and useful, but his translation is meaningless. What that reference explains is that in FR law, when a party makes a judicial admission, in order for the judge to use that admission as the basis for deciding against the person who made the admission, the judge has to take the admission in its entirety, as a whole. They can't just take one part of it.

So (overly simplistic example) if someone admitted on the witness stand, "Yes, I illegally dumped my company's toxic chemicals in the Potomac River," but the trial is about illegally dumping chemicals in the Charles River, you can't use the first part of the admission as proof that the defendant dumped chemicals in the Charles River. You have to look at the entire admission -- and it's about a different river, so it's not proof that he dumped chemicals in the Charles River.

In EN legalese we talk a lot about things being used "in whole or in part." That actually means something that an EN lawyer/paralegal/other person likely to be reading this text would understand. So it works here: a judicial admission cannot be used only in part against its author. We understand that to mean that if you want to use it at all, you have to use the whole thing.







--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2019-10-14 18:31:18 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

PS re your comment on SafeTex's suggestion: Yes, that's exactly what "contre son auteur" means: against the person who said it; as evidence against him; to the detriment of his case. And you can just translate it straightforwardly as "against its author."

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2019-10-15 15:56:55 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

To address Adrian's totally misplaced concerns, I will make life easy by pasting the key points from the link that I already provided:

"Judicial admission means an admission made by a party in a judicial proceeding... or a failure to officially dispute an assertion. Judicial admissions must be in writing except when they are part of the court record" (i.e., when they're said in testimony, so they appear on the transcript). https://definitions.uslegal.com/j/judicial-admission/

So, Adrian:
(1) no, it has nothing to do with judges admitting evidence;

(2) yes, it's an in-court admission, as in the FR;

(3) no, it has nothing to do with judicial notice (https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1065; and

"3(b)" (your numbering system) no, the word "author" doesn't imply that the admission is written rather than oral. For instance, a singer is the "author" of a copyrighted sound recording; see also definition 2a here: AUTHOR - "one that originates or creates something: source" (author of software; author of a film; author of a crime).
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/author

Eliza Hall
United States
Local time: 04:45
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 145
Grading comment
Selected automatically based on peer agreement.

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  AllegroTrans: You could say "maker" instead of "author" but this is fine
2 hrs
  -> Yes, maker works too.

agree  Daryo
13 hrs
  -> Thanks.

neutral  Adrian MM.: (a) a judicial admission is ambiguous for 1. the judge's admission of evidence 2. an admission in court (called formal in BrE) or 3. judicial notice (b) an author/ess implies the admission is written - not oral & (c) I agree with our part/ial overlap only
19 hrs
  -> If you had simply clicked on the link I provided, you would have realized that your criticisms are incorrect.

agree  Cyril Tollari
1 day 12 mins
  -> Merci.

agree  Michael Confais (X)
4 days
  -> Merci.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Reference comments


26 mins peer agreement (net): +5
Reference: Explanation

Reference information:
Hello

This document has a detailed explanation of what it supposedly means


    Reference: http://cours-de-droit.net/les-preuves-parfaites-ecrit-aveu-j...
SafeTex
France
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 87

Peer comments on this reference comment (and responses from the reference poster)
agree  Eliza Hall: Good reference.
1 hr
agree  Adrian MM.
1 hr
agree  AllegroTrans
6 hrs
agree  Daryo
14 hrs
agree  Cyril Tollari
1 day 1 hr
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)



Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.

KudoZ™ translation help

The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.


See also:
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search