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.
Explanation: Surely a legal question. I had been expecting real ROM/ENG translators to come in on this one: few colleges in the UK offer Romanian, besides Cantab and Westminster. At King's College London Uni, for instance, there had once been two lecturers for one student of Romanian.
I can't see any denial in the source, but the word might be repudiation, disavowal, denial or disafirmation.
disclaimer is for an inheritances and ny company liquidators of 'onerous' leases.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 days 10 hrs (2021-08-28 23:37:56 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
I’m trying not to be as pedantic as I’d like because it seems unhelpful here, but no, we can’t disclaim statements other than misquotes or misattributions; and we can’t disclaim facts, as facts can’t be attributed to someone in the first place. They belong only to reality.
Arguably we can refute or rebut facts; but I wouldn’t even say that, as one of my supervising attorneys taught me facts are immutable and undeniable because otherwise they wouldn’t be facts.
Facts usually is a bad word choice in repudiation; “deny the fact that” usually means “deny the claim that” or (better) “deny that,” omitting the f- word which contributes nothing besides trouble.
Again, that’s if we want to be technically correct.
I have put DISCLAIM (with colloquial usage, not legal): "At the hearing on January 22 2020, the Claimant stated that the minor is not the daughter of the Respondent, disclaiming this fact under any circumstances." Although I have suggested to the client the idea of using "contradict". But in the meantime I think this may work anyway. Should I close the question without an answer?
@Lara, i think the Romanian text is pretty ambiguous because it's not really clear who is not making any claims with regard to the child. It might also mean that the mother stated that the child was not the defendant's daughter and that HE (the defendant) was not making any claim that he was the father and that he does not want anything to do with the child after the proceedings are over. Sometimes, when I've come across sentences that were not very clear, I managed to understand what was meant later on when I finished reading the whole text that needed to be translated, because the same fact was referenced in a clearer way later on.
Thanks, by the way "refute a claim" is not solely a legal expression in English, in fact this is not legal at all, it simply means to say a fact is not true, even in colloquial language. In the meantime, are you going to post the answer to the Kudoz question itself, so that I can put your answer (with your Kudoz points) into the glossary? Let me know what you want to do. Thanks.
sorry, is hard by text. I got your point but wee are discussing legal things now, not translation issues. Legally, the birth certificate is good. I think the birth certificate is not wrong because nobody done a mistake when they done it. In Romania we may think that the birth certificate is wrong when somebody wrote wrong name, dates etc. That birth certificate was good until the moment she declared the father's minor is not the biological father. Now, after the trial, the father needs to change the birth certificate.
Refute = disprove; what we seem to be discussing here is repudiate or disavow.
To my mind in US, a birth certif isn't about truth/lies or biological reality; it's just a position statement by a person listed as parent or child, which a court may ratify or not. Absent a conflict, the court's main interest is not to ascertain the biology but to ensure no one is unwillingly vested with unjustifiable privileges or burdens.
Well, any revision does have to be ratified by a court before the municipal clerk will officially accept it for filing, but the court proceeding usually is uncontested.
You have misunderstood me, this is not the translation, I was trying to explain what I think the meaning is, that is to say, is the mother saying that although the birth certificate states that YYY is the father, she is now changing this fact and is saying that he is not the father really...I mean are the facts of the case no saying that the birth certificate is incorrect because YYY (husband) is not really the father?
I cannot answer to this question because I need to see the birth certificate. If you have the birth certificate have a look to the father's name and see if it is matching with the defendant's name.
So the birth certificate states the defendant is the father of the baby? Or is the father on the birth certificate a different person? I did not understand all your sentences.
"în ședința din 22 ianuarie 2020, că minora nu este fiica pârâtului, neformulând nici o cerere în privința minorei.
"Denying the claim under any circumstances..."? Just checking".
neformulând nici o cerere în privința minorei. - not making any claim regarding the minor or claiming nothing regarding the minor I do not think that the term Denying is the right one here, that's why I have explain you the text, but is your choice to make and to decide.
So she told a lie in the beginning, and now she is admitting that she reported a false fact on the birth certificate and that the baby is not the baby of YYY after all?
when you have a baby and you go to make the birth certificate you declare to the council the mother and the father but can be another biological father (because you lied when you registered the child). The person who is there will believe you will not ask for a DNA test. After, the father declared on the birth certificate can find the true and can ask a paternity test on the trial.
The reason I do not understand is because the defendant is YYY. THerefore, the paragraph is saying that the child was born to YYY, but even so this same child is not his baby....? This is not possible biologically.
născută la X martie 20xx în Rm. Vâlcea, din părinți YYY si ZZZ, the minor was born from the parents (and names). But I will translate : According with the birth certificate attached to the file(or folder) by the claimant, which expressly mentioned, on the session from..., that the minor is not the daughter of the defendant, not making any claim regarding to the minor. Sorry if my English translation is not perfect. My target language is Romanian or Spanish.
no, she didn't change her mind. I am guessing she was filing the divorce or splitting a relationship. So, when she started the trial she asked for something and she had a baby borne during the trial but the baby's father is not the defendant, that's why , the claimant of this trail she has expressly specified that the bay is not with the defendant and she presented the birth certificate of the child.
So she changed her mind? This is the point I am trying to make - did I understand this bit correctly - i.e. it was her that submitted the birth certificate, although it was her again that claimed otherwise and that the certificate was incorrect after all...?
Something like this: During the trial, the claimant gave birth to a child, XX, born on X March 20xx in Rm. Vâlcea, of parents YYY and ZZZ, according to the birth certificate submitted to the file, by the claimant, who specified, in the meeting of xx January 2020 , that the minor is not the daughter of the defendant, not formulating any request/claim regarding the minor. "
Would I be correct to say that the Claimant submitted the birth certificate but then denied her original certificate and said that the baby was not the baby of the father on the birth certificate?
"Pe parcursul procesului, reclamanta a dat naștere unui copil, XX, născută la X martie 20xx în Rm. Vâlcea, din părinți YYY si ZZZ, conform certificatului de naștere depus la dosar, de reclamantă, care a precizat, în ședința din xx ianuarie 2020, că minora nu este fiica pârâtului, neformulând nici o cerere în privința minorei. "
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
3 days 10 hrs confidence:
not making any application vs. repudiating the claim in respect of the minor
Explanation: Surely a legal question. I had been expecting real ROM/ENG translators to come in on this one: few colleges in the UK offer Romanian, besides Cantab and Westminster. At King's College London Uni, for instance, there had once been two lecturers for one student of Romanian.
I can't see any denial in the source, but the word might be repudiation, disavowal, denial or disafirmation.
disclaimer is for an inheritances and ny company liquidators of 'onerous' leases.
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 days 10 hrs (2021-08-28 23:37:56 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
... disaffirmation ....
Example sentence(s):
A claim or response can be amended but requires the claimant or defendant to make an application to the Court.
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.