Podem constituir força maior, designadamente

14:43 Jul 14, 2019 

I know it's a contract, but I also know that "designadamente" only has one viable translation, and that is "namely". The "inclusive'" thing is entirely subjective (whether from a lawyer or jurist or whomever). I'm done with this discussion. Matter of fact, I try to stay away from "post-truth" discussions in which evidence and references are not taken into account. They consume too much of one's time and don't take anywhere. Glad my answer got two "thumbs up". Have a good day.

06:34 Jun 28, 2019 

The source text is a contract, so certainty is of the essence. Readers of the contract need to understand if the list of cases of force majeure is exhaustive, or not.
The key word here is designadamente. The Portuguese STA has decided that, in a legal context, designadamente is exemplificative.
The available US/UK resources state that, in a legal context, "namely" is exhaustive.
Namely cannot therefore be an accurate translation of designadamente, in our context. It is our job as translators of legal texts to respect the principle of legal certainty and not to introduce uncertainty into the target text, when it is absent in the source text. BTW the STA held that nomeadamente is also exemplificative, so namely/nomeadamente are false friends, in a legal context.

The references to the case law are:

http://www.dgsi.pt/jsta.nsf/35fbbbf22e1bb1e680256f8e003ea931...
https://dre.pt/web/guest/pesquisa-avancada/-/asearch/518602/...

22:09 Jun 27, 2019 

I hate to say, but I think you are the one who has miscontrued the translation. The term is short and sweet. No need to complicate a simple English word.

URL provided by Gilmar showing the proper translation for "designadamente": https://www.infopedia.pt/dicionarios/portugues-ingles/design...

As far as "podem constituir": To the best of my knowledge, "poder" indicates probability, not certainty. See def. no. 7: http://www.aulete.com.br/poder

I'm pretty much done with this discussion. Have a great day.

19:56 Jun 27, 2019 

Blacka Law Dictionary, which is the primary US Law Dictionary. Your sources are correct but you have misconstrued them. "Used in a formal document, the term indicates what is included in the preceding words. Synonymous to that is to say, to wit , to state more particularly, to mention by name." In our case it tells us what is included in força maior, i.e. it is exhaustive and not exemplative, whereas designadamente is exemplative. The source term and the target term are therefore mismatched.

19:42 Jun 27, 2019 

Not sure where you got this. Can you provide the source (URL)? This is what I found:

"namely: Used in a formal document, the term indicates what is included in the preceding words. Synonymous to that is to say, to wit , to state more particularly, to mention by name." - https://legaldictionary.lawin.org/namely/

Please note: "the term indicates what is included..." To me, this is just a matter of personal preference between a translation that's closer to the source-text (mine) and one that departs from the source-text. There's nothing wrong with my answer.

17:17 Jun 27, 2019 

The problem here is is the list exhaustive or exemplative. If it is merely exemplative then "includes" works, but if the list is exhaustive, it does not. There is a longstanding debate about the meanings of designadamente and whether it is exhaustive. The conclusion reached is sometimes it is sometimes it is not, depending on the context. However, the Tribunal Supremo Administrativo (Portugal) considered this issue on 15/05/2003 in Case no. 01802/02 and held: "A expressão utilizada naquele Despacho ("designadamente") sempre foi entendida, quer pela Doutrina, quer pela Jurisprudência, como incidindo sobre um elenco meramente exemplificativo de matérias que, por isso mesmo, comporta um leque mais alargado;"
Accordingly and so far as legal usage is concerned it is established case law in Portugal that designadamente is exemplative.
Namely however, is exhaustive. Blacks Law Dictionary says. "Namely imports interpretation, i.e. indicates what is included in the previous term."
Namely is not therefore a good translation of designadamente.