This question was closed without grading. Reason: No acceptable answer
Oct 14, 2023 11:03
7 mos ago
28 viewers *
French term

le préjudice doit être certain dans son principe

French to English Law/Patents Law: Contract(s)
Case based on a clause in a contract which the plaintiff says should have given him an "earn-out".

" ...
Des dommages-intérêts ne peuvent être alloués que si le juge, au moment où il statue, constate qu'il est résulté un préjudice de la faute contractuelle (Cass. 3e civ., ...).
Le préjudice doit être certain dans son principe et dans son montant (Cass. com., ...).

En l'espèce, l'article 3.3 du protocole d'accord du 12 mai 2021 conclu avec la société AAA stipule que « Monsieur BBB accorde à la Société, rétroactivement à compter de son immatriculation, une licence, non exclusive d'utilisation et d'exploitation, à titre gratuit du site internet dont l'adresse est : ....com.
...
"

I've looked at the definition of "principe" in TLFi, etc. I don't think this means "in principle". From the context it might mean something more like "intrinsically" or even "as a matter of fact".

Discussion

Emmanuella Oct 16, 2023:
Définition du préjudice certain ( caractères / principes du préjudice).
https://aurelienbamde.com/2019/11/13/conditions-de-mise-en-o...
Charlie Bavington Oct 16, 2023:
Ooops :) Fair point! Don't know what I was thinking there :) In this context however, given the "préjudice" appears to be financial and assuming it to be the case, I'd still prefer loss, I think, all others things being equal (e.g. the word isn't already being used to refer to some different aspect of the matter & it would be confusing to use it again).

You could then have "the fact and value/amount of the loss must be clearly established..." it's that kind of idea but "fact & value of [whatever you decide]" or similar is quite a useful construction for brevity if you have to be more long-winded about "certain".
Mpoma (asker) Oct 16, 2023:
@CharlieB The word used in this text, and the sentence of interest, is préjudice, though, not dommage. I usually translate the former by "damage", accepting it as countable, which is recognised as feasible in English-language legalese. And incidentally solving many a real headache when translating French legalese.
ph-b (X) Oct 15, 2023:
principe Règle juridique établie par un texte en termes assez généraux destinés à inspirer diverses applications et s'imposant avec une autorité supérieure.
Cornu, Gérard Vocabulaire juridique
Emmanuella Oct 15, 2023:
My view , the same as yours = ' ... demontrating that it is damage/loss according to the legal definition' = fondé juridiquement. ( Cassation civ. )What else ?
Charlie Bavington Oct 15, 2023:
FWIW, dommage is not damage, or at least, not only and not necessarily. I usually translate it as "loss or harm" because it is, in principle (!) referring to whatever it is that the insurance is supposed to compensate for, whether it is replacing your car or a factory or the notional worth of your left leg.
Mpoma (asker) Oct 15, 2023:
Its existence is established Yes, that's my suspicion. But if Emmanuella can point to evidence of her view... Of course préjudice/damage *is* a juridical thing, so showing proof of its existence necessarily means demonstrating that it is damage according to the legal definition rather than any other notion of "damage".
Daryo Oct 15, 2023:
"as a matter of fact" is the idea IOW "être certain dans son principe" = be sure that what happened does qualify as "un préjudice de la faute contractuelle" i.e. there is no doubt that some damage was caused by not respecting the contrat.

First step: "is there any damage?" Only if caused by ignoring the contract, otherwise it doesn't count. (=être certain dans son principe)
Next step: what's the verified/certain amount of the damage? (=être certain dans son montant)
Emmanuella Oct 14, 2023:
Je pense plutôt à 'qu'il est fondé juridiquement'
philgoddard Oct 14, 2023:
Could it mean occurrence, in other words the fact that it exists?

Proposed translations

3 hrs

the loss needs (to) be ascertained and liquidated in substantia

préjudice : (head of ) loss, rather than damage.

principe: general rule (Bridge) is n/a here.

The technique of in substantia, rather than in substantive terms or its substance, to avoid a 'substance abuse' and for ProZ fans of Latin.
Example sentence:

IATE: fr dépense admise dans son en expenditure approved in principle

Le préjudice doit être certain ; plus encore, le préjudice doit être actuel, certain et direct, selon une *trilogie élaborée* et surtout retenue en jurisprudence.

Peer comment(s):

neutral Emmanuella : Certain, not ascertained, see definition in DB
2 days 2 hrs
neutral AllegroTrans : Certain, not ascertained
2 days 2 hrs
Something went wrong...
3 hrs

[...] must be certain in terms of (being based on) principle [and in amount]

.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 hrs (2023-10-14 15:12:23 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

https://www.balfour-manson.co.uk/media/e31j3nwf/differences-...

As a legal system, Scots Law prides itself on being based on principle
Peer comment(s):

neutral AllegroTrans : "based on principle" sounds too woolly to me
1 hr
neutral Daryo : this text is not about THAT kind of "principles"
11 hrs
Something went wrong...
+1
4 days

The loss must be properly founded/ substantiated

in straightforward, idiomatic English;
Peer comment(s):

agree AllegroTrans
3 hrs
Thank you!
Something went wrong...
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search