This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
modalità formulario
messa a dimora talee

Glossary entry

Italian term or phrase:

non apposte

English translation:

of no effect

Added to glossary by Anna ZANNELLA
Apr 29, 2013 21:52
11 yrs ago
3 viewers *
Italian term

non apposte

Italian to English Law/Patents Law: Contract(s) service and maintenance
It occurs in the following paragraph of a service and maintenance contract:
".....restando inteso che eventuali condizioni generali allegate ai singoli Buoni d’Ordine in modalità formulario dovranno intendersi ad ogni effetto di legge come *non apposte* e che in caso di discordanza fra le clausole e le condizioni contenute nel Contratto e quelle contenute negli Ordini di Acquisto, le prime prevarranno sulle altre."

There is a 2006 Proz Glossary entry which translates this as "deemed not to have been inserted..."
The Latin is supposedly - "tamquam non esset/essent" or "tamquam ipsae non essent" - as never having existed.

I'm looking for a better legitimate way of saying this in English possibly without using "insertion" ?
Proposed translations (English)
5 +1 of no effect
4 devoid of purpose
4 not attached
4 non-existent

Discussion

Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo May 1, 2013:
@ Thomas I agree with you: it's obviously the translator's own call what to use. I remain of the opinion that the option I proposed ("shall be deemed/considered as non-existent") is the best. See also: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=it&lng1=it,... "Any other view would result in Regulation No 1521/95 having to be regarded AS NON-EXISTENT or the Court itself being given the power to fix the export refund independently." P.S. Sorry for the first quotation (the judgment): I had to rewrite it since it was written in capital letters, so I could not copy/paste it. I simply forgot to add inverted commas.
Thomas Roberts May 1, 2013:
generally Obviously views will differ about this in different legal systems. Whilst I would not purport to be able to say anything meaningful about any other legal system or the use of an equivalent term in any other language, I think a common lawyer would have various problems with non-existent in this context and would regard it as a product of muddled thinking.

Non-existent gives no indication as to whether the rule is unenforceable, invalid ab initio, initially valid but subsequentely voided, not applicable by virtue of a condition subsequent, not applicable due to the failure to meet with the prerequisites of a condition precedent. It says nothing about whether it has been repealed, amended, its effects have expired, or simply that it was not enacted/agreed upon according to valid procedures.

I'm sure that the lawyer in the staff case referred to above must have had proper reasons for using the term, though the fact that it is placed between interved commas in the judgment (which have been removed from the above quote) suggests that there must be some reason for it which was specific to that case.

Ultimately though it's obviously the translator's own call what to use.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo May 1, 2013:
As a last, conciliatory word... please accept my last reference, which is from EUR-LEX:

"22 One of the applicants in this respect maintains that the PROVISIONS of Article 4 ( 3 ) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations amount to illegality of so striking a kind that they must be considered as NON-EXISTENT.". http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&ihmlang=...

I did not mean to criticise anyone, I just wanted to propose my opinion. I respect your point of view, but I am still convinced that you can say that a provision may be "considered as non-existent". That is just what the EUR-LEX translator has written. Thomas and James (Jim) think that I cannot use such expression for a provision or a rule? Well, I respect their opinion, but I still think that they are wrong. You may notice that I did not criticise Thomas' suggestion ("devoid of purpose"), and even wrote that Jim's suggestion "is not that bad". As I said, I just proposed my option ("shall be deemed/regarded as non-existent"), and when Jim and Thomas criticised it, I provided many references which, in my opinion, substantiate my point. Have a nice day!!! ;-)
James (Jim) Davis May 1, 2013:
@Finword Of course you are right, but... Honest debate is one thing and a good thing, but in a team people need to play in their strongest position, not their weakest.
I always try to remember to visit the EN->IT kudoz community and contribute my native speaker comprehension of English, because I value that same comprehension of Italian so much from native italian contributors here in the IT->EN community. I would never dream of visiting the EN->IT community and telling them that in my opinion, their comprehension of Italian was “totally wrong”. They would tear me to shreds and I have been torn to shreds by that community for so much less! To use footballing metaphors, here we have a goal keeper deserting his goal and trying to score. The other players on the field are complaining, not without good reason. Now please finish this with a short, sweet and conciliatory last word :-).
FinWord Apr 30, 2013:
Let's be professional (sorry Menander) there is a lot of talent in the community...excellent translation requires in depth knowledge of the source and target language, the subject material and the general context in the specific country or industry (not to mention an ability to actually write well in the target language). There are very few people who possess all of those talents together and that is why people come here for help. Guys, let's use this forum to promote knowledge rather than trying to prove something. Let's learn from each other.
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
@Sebastiano Anything else you think we might have forgotten?
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
@Thomas I remind you that one of the references I quoted says: "Means that a contract, or a particular clause in a contract, is regarded as non-existent." (you will find it below), at which you said that it was not written by native speakers. As I said, our points are sufficiently clear: you think that I cannot say that a clause, a term or a condition may be or shall be "regarded/deemed/considered as non-existent", while I think the opposite is true. Don't you think that our friend Menander has every chance of deciding on that point? Indeed, our positions have been repeated maybe too many times. Let's call it a day. :-)
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
not really I still think that there is a bit of a muddle here.
Actions, decisions, rules and bodies are legally distinct entitles, so the fact that a body such as a trust may be non-existent (with which I fully agree) does not imply that a rule can be non-existent. A rule can be invalid, inapplicable or unenforceable, but non-existent.
I think it's quite a narrow point, with which others may or may not agree, and it's important to avoid the temptation to go off on tangents or raise red herrings.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
@ James (Jim) I understand you have nothing more to say, which is why you keep diverting the attention from the subject of our discussion. I think Thomas has perfectly understood what I was meaning.
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
Please write in your native language Sebastiano because this, "(for any of which I provided a reference)", doesn't make any sense.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
for the sake of clarity: the legal concept to which I referred is quite simple: an act, a decision, a provision, a clause (for any of which I provided a reference) may be considered, for various reasons, as non-existent. This means that they do exist, but the judge and the parties must consider them as non-existent. I provided at least 5 examples of use of such expression, and I am convinced that any impartial observer is perfectly able to judge whether or not this is legal English and whether or not this expression may apply to Terms and Conditions. You have your opinion, which I respect. I have mine. On my suggestion as well as on yours. Any further discussion would be futile.
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
clarity I think it is important not to confuse different types of legal concept. A rule is one thing, an action is another, and an entity or another. Whether an act or an entity can be non-existent is beside the point for this question. Here it is rules (T&Cs) which are at issue.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
@ Jim (James) I have just found another reference, which I think you will find interesting and valuable. Of course, Thomas will share this opinion, since he holds EUR-LEX in such high esteem. In this document: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=it&lng1=it,... you will find the following phrase: "However, that principle does not apply to acts tainted by an irregularity whose gravity is so obvious that it cannot be tolerated. Such acts must be regarded as non-existent." Since I found it on EUR-LEX, whose translator are, as Thomas rightly said, qualified lawyers having a very good knowledge of the source language, I think that "regarded as non-existent" (here is referred to an act) is legal English indeed, don't you think? So you were definitely wrong, weren't you?
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
Please desist with the capital Sebastiano. Not only is it like shouting (bad manners) in English, but it is also against kudoz rules.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
@ James (Jim) I thought we were not discussing about English grammar, and I really find your corrections quite immaterial. We were discussing about whether or not my suggestion "shall be deemed as non-existent" is a good one. Your futile attempts to divert attention from this issue, with your remarks on English grammar, are a good sign of how inconsistent your arguments are. I really think we have helped our friend and she will choose the best option. Further discussions would only be futile and perhaps childish.
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
I think we both have explained quite clearly our respective positions many times.
I think we have both explained our respective positions quite clearly.

I suggest we end this dicussion here, leaving others to judge which of our suggestions best answers the asker's question.
I suggest ending here this discussion, leaving others to judge which of our suggestions best fits the Asker's requirement.

The use of a capital letter here for "Asker" is a serious mistake, which only a native English primary school pupil, or non native speaker would make Sebastiano.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
@ James (Jim) I think we both have explained quite clearly our respective positions many times. I suggest ending here this discussion, leaving others to judge which of our suggestions best fits the Asker's requirement. (By the way, yours is not that bad, in my opinion). :-)
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
Fine about calling it a day However, it is a gross misrepresentation to say that Eurolex is not written by lawyers. Entry into the EU lawyer-linguist service is conditional upon possession of a law degree in the target language, native speaker status in the target language, and an excellent command of the source language.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
@ Thomas I would suggest... ... ending this discussion, since our points have been duly clarified many times. As regards references, which you would like coming from "native speakers, preferably lawyers" (your words), I remind you that you quoted EUR-LEX to substantiate your suggestion (which I find, by the way, quite imprecise), which is not exactly an example of legal English written from lawyers.
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
@Sebastiano How can I be totally wrong about the "object" of this "query". Menander's objective in posting the question was to find a good translation for the term. I have merely attempted to help her achieve that object. I have no reason to express any opinion on it. What exactly do you mean. Please explain in Italian if that is easier.
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
I would suggest we stick to references from texts written by native speakers, preferably lawyers, otherwise we risk running around in circles all day.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
I am afraid your opinion is mistaken. In fact, I am still convinced that you are totally wrong as regards the object of this query. My references are quite telling, and you can find many other references to the same effect. By the way, I only used upper case letters in order to clarify my opinion, since I had evidence that it was not perfectly grasped by some. Thank you for correcting me on that bit. :-)
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
Your opinion is mistaken. I did consider the "deemed as" part. Please stop using upper case letters Sebastiano, it is considered shouting in English. Your references are not "telling" but weak. Everybody is entitled to an opinion and that is mine. Permit me to correct your English: "The conditions/clauses are certainly existing, but...". This should be "The conditions/clauses certainly exist".
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
As a student of legal English, I am of the opinion that you did not understand the meaning of the translation I proposed. I did not propose using "non-existent", but "AS NON-EXISTENT" (I omitted "as" just to conform strictly with the query, but the examples I cited are quite telling). The conditions/clauses are certainly existing, but they should be treated, due to the reasons specified in the Agreement, AS NON-EXISTENT. Apart from the Memorandum of Association, I also cited three other documents in which a trust, a provision and a clause/a contract are, due to various irregularities affecting them, to be TREATED/DEEMED AS NON-EXISTENT. I respect your opinion, but, while I am just a student of Legal English, (and not a native as you are), I am absolutely convinced that in Legal English you are perfectly entitled to say that a clause, a term or a condition, due to some irregularity/invalidity affecting them, should be "TREATED AS NON-EXISTENT". I am not teaching you a lesson, far from that. But I am entitled to my opinion on Legal English (which I have been studying for many years), even if English is not my mother tongue. And I think I have duly and abundantly motivated such opinion.
James (Jim) Davis Apr 30, 2013:
@Sebastiano As a native English speaker, I don't think you would use "non-existent" in legal English in this way. You might use it to teach of explain legal English, but not as a term for use in contracts or court, except to establish total physical absence of a thing. I have just read one of your links, the articles of association of a Cyprus based company called Pasalba which on close scrutiny is clearly not a native English document. Personally, I tend to bow to native Italian speakers and hesitate to dictate Italian usage to them.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
The relevance will be perceived ..by the reader. As you obviously did not notice, the three texts do not say that the trust, or the contract, or the provision, DO NOT EXIST. They say that, because of one or other issue, they should be "REGARDED AS NON-EXISTENT". Which is different. And which is definitely Legal English, as any observer (but you) will have understood abundantly.
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
I don't understand the relevance of trusts my problem with the use of "non-existence" is that it can't be used in relation to terms and conditions.
A trust is a legal entity and there is nothing wrong with saying that a legal entity is non-existent if it does not exist. It's like saying "the company Woolworths does not exist" or "the government of the Soviet Union does not exist"
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
I have cited three examples... ...one of which, as you may read, concerns a trust, and as you may read below, states clearly that "the trust will be treated AS NON-EXISTENT for all purposes". See also http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1046880/0001193125130... (a Memorandum of Association) where you can find "any provisions that are inconsistent with the nature of the Company as a private company shall be adapted accordingly or shall be deemed AS NON-EXISTENT and will be ignored.". I think that everyone may reasonably think that this expression is definitely Legal English. In spite of your respectable opinion.
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
I don't think so Please find me an example of its use in a contract from this page:

http://www.google.com/#output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q="as NO...
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
that's your opinion You will find umpteen examples of use of the expression "as non-existent" on the net, but I am sure that you will always say that they were not written by native speakers. In this document http://www.globelawandbusiness.com/tipj10/sample.pdf written in the U.S.A., you can read that "the trust will be treated AS NON-EXISTENT for all purposes". The impartial reader may well judge upon my examples and yours (which are... non-existent).
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
no, it's not It's an industry standard that translations should be done by real native speakers, not one of my personal quirks.
And very sorry to disappoint yet again, but this translation was also done by a non native speaker.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
This is from .co.uk, and this is Legal English. I will provide a link .co.uk, which I hope will satisfy your thirst for "real Legal English". http://www.neteven.co.uk/neteven-policies-14-17.html Under Article 15, apparently written in Britain (.co.uk), you will easily find the following phrase: The provision regarded as invalid or NON-EXISTENT shall automatically be replaced by a provision whose content shall be as close as possible to the provision replaced.
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
unfortunately the link you provided a reference to was not written by a native speaker
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
I totally disagre with you. In legal English you may certainly say that "a clause is regarded/deemed as non-existent", as you certainly can verify through the link that I already indicated twice... :-)
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
I understand that's what the Latin means However, this is not how the concept is expressed in legal English, where the important points are about validity, applicability and enforceability.
Sebastiano Massimo Barbagallo Apr 30, 2013:
"come non apposte" means "come se non esistessero" (which the Latin admirably and concisely expressed with "TAMQUAM NON ESSENT", as the Asker rightly reminded. Well, "TAMQUAM NON ESSENT" translates literally as "AS NON-EXISTENT", i.e. "come se non esistessero", alias, "come se non fossero state apposte", and so on. :-)
Thomas Roberts Apr 30, 2013:
and I would assume the purchase order contains a similar clause purporting to exclude the seller's terms
FinWord Apr 30, 2013:
I agree that you should avoid "inserted" in this case, not least because rather than dealing with a clause/condition in the master agreement, you are actually dealing with conditions that may appear in one document but are superceded or rendered null by conditions that may appear in another

Proposed translations

+1
9 hrs
Selected

of no effect

shall be deemed as having no effect under the law....and therefore (implied) not enforceable

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2013-04-30 09:59:48 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

All representations, promises, warranties or statements by any agent or employee of VELOCITY CONSULTING that differ in any way from the terms and conditions hereof **shall have no effect**. Any additional contradictory or different terms contained in any initial or subsequent order or communication from Purchaser pertaining to the goods are hereby objected to and **shall be of no effect**.
Peer comment(s):
agree Thomas Roberts : sounds good
4 hrs
thx. not the only option, but standard phrasing and...well, given today's exchange between "practitioners"
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "I had to decide on what makes sense - this is tantamount to them "not existing" by effect of law. I do not negate that some may use the "do not exist" term. "
3 mins

devoid of purpose

One possibility, also confirmed by eurolex:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&ihmlang=...
Something went wrong...
10 hrs

not attached

Must be deemed as not attached. In this particular context I think there is no need to search for legal or Latin terms. Any conditions attached must be deemed (as if) not attached. This is "apporre" in the sense of apporre una firma (to sign) or apporre una data (to date).
Something went wrong...
8 hrs

non-existent

that is not a literal translation, but the effect and the meaning are definitely equivalent. What has not been inserted, what should be regarded as not to have been inserted, is "as non-existent" (tamquam non esset)

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/emire/BELGIUM/NULLITYOFCONTRA...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 10 hrs (2013-04-30 08:13:10 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In this document http://www.globelawandbusiness.com/tipj10/sample.pdf, written in the U.S.A., you can read that "the trust will be treated AS NON-EXISTENT for all purposes".

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 10 hrs (2013-04-30 08:15:07 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

this is the correct link: http://www.globelawandbusiness.com/tipj10/sample.pdf

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 11 hrs (2013-04-30 08:58:41 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In this document, a Memorandum of Association: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1046880/0001193125130...

immediately above the Section "Shares", you can read "The Regulations set below must be read, interpreted and applied on the basis that this Company is private and therefore any provisions that are inconsistent with the nature of the Company as a private company shall be adapted accordingly or shall be deemed AS NON-EXISTENT and will be ignored."

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2013-04-30 09:55:26 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

@ Asker: of course I wrote "non-existent" to conform strictly with the query, which is "non apposte". It seems quite clear that I did not propose translating "non-existent" without the previous "AS". In fact, the conditions are certainly existing, but, due to the reasons specified in the Agreement, they "shall be deemed AS NON-EXISTENT".

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs (2013-04-30 11:27:54 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I have just found another reference, this time from EUR-LEX. In this document:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=it&lng1=it,... you will find the following phrase: "However, that principle does not apply to acts tainted by an irregularity whose gravity is so obvious that it cannot be tolerated. Such acts must be regarded AS NON-EXISTENT."

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 14 hrs (2013-04-30 12:14:13 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/emire/BELGIUM/NULLITYOFCONTRA...

"Means that a contract, or a particular clause in a contract, is regarded AS NON-EXISTENT."

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 14 hrs (2013-04-30 12:30:47 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.neteven.co.uk/neteven-policies-14-17.html
Under Article 15, apparently written in Britain (.co.uk), you will easily find the following phrase: “The provision regarded as invalid or NON-EXISTENT shall automatically be replaced by a provision whose content shall be as close as possible to the provision replaced.”


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 15 hrs (2013-04-30 13:31:27 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=en&ihmlang=...

"22 One of the applicants in this respect maintains that the PROVISIONS of Article 4 ( 3 ) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations amount to illegality of so striking a kind that they must be considered as NON-EXISTENT.".

If a provision of law can be "considered as non-existent", I do not see any reason why a term or a condition could not be "considered as non-existent" due to some irregularity affecting them.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 15 hrs (2013-04-30 13:35:07 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Indeed, it is a provision of Annex VII to the EU Staff regulations which is "considered as non-existent" due to some illegality/irregularity. This is quite similar to a term or a condition, isn't it?

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day11 hrs (2013-05-01 08:58:10 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Notice.do?mode=dbl&lang=it&lng1=it,...

""Any other view would result in Regulation No 1521/95 having to be regarded AS NON-EXISTENT..."
Peer comment(s):
disagree Thomas Roberts : It doesn't mean that they don't exist. The buyer's T&Cs clearly still exist. The point here is that they don't apply insofar as in conflict with the seller's terms.
1 hr
Nobody said they DO NOT EXIST! They simply shall be deemed "AS NON-EXISTENT". Please see this link: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/emire/BELGIUM/NULLITYOFCONTRA... As the asker rightly said, in Latin this concept is "TAMQUAM NON ESSENT". :-)
agree Chiara Deaglio
2 hrs
thank you
neutral James (Jim) Davis : As a native English speaker, I don't think you would use "non-existent" in legal English in this way. You might use it to teach of explain legal English, but not as a term for use in contracts or court, except to establish total physical absence.
3 hrs
Notwithstanding your opinion, I have found and cited telling examples of the use of "regarded/treated/deemed as non-existent" in legal contexts. "As non-existent" does not imply "physical absence". It means to treat something AS IT WERE physically absent
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search