English in Law (Advanced) E-Book

Patrizia Giampieri

• Herausgeber: Patrizia Giampieri
• Kategorie: Gesellschafts- und Liebesromane
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2021

Beschreibung

This book presents a series of texts and exercises on legal matters which will prepare the student gradually to reach, respectively, the C1 and C2 level of English, according to the European Common Framework of Reference for Languages.
The book is written in English and is divided into three parts.
The first part focuses on European Case Law, whereas the second part focuses on the UK and the US litigation systems. Part I and II are particularly suitable for advanced students (C1 level) and can also complement the preparation of the TOLES (Test of Legal English Skills) (Higher level).
The third part focuses on the UK Case Law, whereas the fourth deals with Contract Law in common law systems. Part III and IV are indicated for proficiency students (C2 level) and can also complement the preparation of the Advanced level of the TOLES.
There are exercises, glossaries and case study to focus on. All exercises come with keys.
- - -
The author is a lecturer of English at the School of Law of the Univeristy of Camerino (MC). She is an interpreter and translator for the Court of Perugia. She regularly lectures in courses and seminars for lawyers and legal translators. She has written books and academic articles on Legal English.

Leseprobe

Patrizia Giampieri

English In Law (Advanced)

UUID: c19f274e-fdc0-4c5c-be66-b47f61d4a864

This ebook was created with StreetLib Writehttp://write.streetlib.com

Table of contents

English In Law (Advanced)

Table of Contents

PART I THE EUROPEAN CASE LAW

CHAPTER 1 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #1)

KEYS TO EXERCISES IN CHAPTER 1 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #1)

CHAPTER 2 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #2)

KEYS TO CHAPTER 2 – THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #2)

CHAPTER 3 THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

KEYS TO CHAPTER 3 - THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

CHAPTER 4 REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY RULING BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU

KEYS TO CHAPTER 4 - REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY RULING BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU

CHAPTER 5 THE EUROPEAN CULTURAL CONVENTION

KEYS TO CHAPTER 5 – THE EUROPEAN CULTURAL CONVENTION

PART II THE UK AND US LITIGATION SYSTEM

CHAPTER 1 THE UK LITIGATION SYSTEM

KEYS TO CHAPTER 1: THE UK LITIGATION SYSTEM

CHAPTER 2 THE US LITIGATION SYSTEM

KEYS TO CHAPTER 2: THE US LITIGATION SYSTEM

PART III THE BRITISH CASE LAW

CHAPTER 1 AGENCY AGREEMENT

KEYS TO CHAPTER 1: AGENCY AGREEMENT

CHAPTER 2: JOINT VENTURE

KEYS TO CHAPTER 2: JOINT VENTURE

CHAPTER 3: LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

KEYS TO CHAPTER 3: LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

CHAPTER 4: MERGER & ACQUISITION

KEYS TO CHAPTER 4: MERGER & ACQUISITION

CHAPTER 5: SALE & PURCHASE AGREEMENT

KEYS TO CHAPTER 5: SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT

PART IV CONTRACT LAW

CHAPTER 1 ENDING A CONTRACT

KEYS TO CHAPTER 1: ENDING A CONTRACT

CHAPTER 2: TERMINATION OF CONTRACT AT COMMON AND CIVIL LAW

KEYS TO CHAPTER 2: TERMINATION OF CONTRACT AT COMMON AND CIVIL LAW

CHAPTER 3: DAMAGES

KEYS TO CHAPTER 3: DAMAGES

English In Law (Advanced)

A Compendium of Legal English for Advanced and Proficiency Students

This book presents a series of texts and exercises on legal matters which will prepare the student gradually to reach, respectively, the C1 and C2 level of English, according to the European Common Framework of Reference for Languages.

The book is written in English and is divided into three parts.

The first part focuses on European Case Law, whereas the second part focuses on the UK and the US litigation systems. Part I and II are particularly suitable for advanced students.

The third part focuses on the UK Case Law, whereas the fourth deals with Contract Law in common law systems. Part III and IV are indicated for proficiency students.

There are exercises, glossaries and case study to focus on. All exercises come with keys.

Table of Contents

PART I THE EUROPEAN CASE LAW

CHAPTER 1 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #1)

KEYS

CHAPTER 2 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #2)

KEYS

CHAPTER 3 THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

KEYS

CHAPTER 4 REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY RULING BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU

KEYS

CHAPTER 5 THE EUROPEAN CULTURAL CONVENTION

KEYS

PART II THE UK AND US LITIGATION SYSTEM

CHAPTER 1 THE UK LITIGATION SYSTEM

KEYS

CHAPTER 2 THE US LITIGATION SYSTEM

KEYS

PART III THE BRITISH CASE LAW

CHAPTER 1 AGENCY AGREEMENT

KEYS

CHAPTER 2: JOINT VENTURE

KEYS

CHAPTER 3: LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

KEYS

CHAPTER 4: MERGER & ACQUISITION

KEYS

CHAPTER 5: SALE & PURCHASE AGREEMENT

KEYS

PART IV CONTRACT LAW

CHAPTER 1 ENDING A CONTRACT

KEYS

CHAPTER 2: TERMINATION OF CONTRACT AT COMMON AND CIVIL LAW

KEYS

CHAPTER 3: DAMAGES

KEYS

PART I THE EUROPEAN CASE LAW

In this part, you will deal with European case law sourced from the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union.

CHAPTER 1 THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (CASE #1)

In this Chapter, you will deal with a case deal with by the European Court of Human Rights, in particular Application no. 23883/06 – Strasboug – Final Judgement 16/03/2009.

TASK 1: Read the text sourced from a case before the European Court of Human Rights and match the words underlined with their translations (see the glossary at the bottom).

TEXT A

1)The applicants, a married couple, live in Uppsala. They have three children, who are now eighteen, sixteen and eight years of age.

From 1 November 1999 they rented a flat in R., a suburb of Stockholm. Rule 13 of the special provisions of the tenancy agreementstipulated the following: “The tenant undertakes not to erect, without specific permission, placards, signs, sunblinds, outdoor aerials and such like on the house.” 2)The agreement further stipulated, as a general condition, that the tenants were obliged to take proper care of the flat and to maintain good sanitary conditions, order and good practice in the house.

3)It appears that when the applicants moved in, there was a satellite dish mounted on the façade, next to one of the windows of the flat. The applicants made use of this in order to receive television programmes in Arabic and Farsi.

4)In October 2003 the applicants' landlord changed. The new landlord, a real-estate company, demanded that the satellite dish be dismantled. The applicants did not comply and, by letter of 2 April 2004, the company gave the applicants notice of termination of the tenancy agreement with effect from 31 July 2004.

5)Further, in April 2004, the landlord initiated proceedingsbefore the Rent Review Board in Stockholm against the applicants and some other tenants who had installed satellite dishes in the same house.

6)The landlord sought execution of the notice of termination, claiming that the applicants' satellite installation violated the express ban in Rule 13 of the tenancy agreement and that, by not complying with the instruction to dismantle the dish, they had failed to maintain good sanitary conditions, order and good practice.

7)Stating that it objected only to satellite dishes mounted on or outside the façade of the house, while allowing, for instance, dishes placed on a balcony, the landlord claimed that the ban on such installations was of considerable importance as the installations a) risked causing injuries to persons and property for which the landlord would be held responsible, b) damaged the house physically and aesthetically and c) obstructed rescue workers' and the landlord's access to the flat.

LEGAL LANGUAGE FOCUS

In Italian there is a distinction between "affitto" and "locazione". Affitto regards land and businesses; locazione regards flats, apartments, rooms. The people involved in a tenancy agreement are landlord/owner (locatore) and tenant (locatario/conduttore). The people involved in a land lease agreement (contratto di affitto) are landlord/owner/lessor (locatore) and lessee (affittuario).

GLOSSARY TRANSLATIONS

Match the words on the left with their translations on the right

applicantsvenir meno a; non...provisionstrasferirsi, traslocaretenancy agreementtentare l'esecuzione / l'attuazione dito move insocietà immobiliarelandlordsoccorritoritenantricorrenti, richiedentireal-estate companyproprietario, locatoreto demandpretendereto comply withobiettare a, opporsi anotice of terminationlocatario, conduttoreproceedingsesser ritenuto responsabile dibefore thedivietoto seek execution ofdisposizionibandinnanzi ato fail todannito object tocausare danniinjuriescontratto di locazionepropertycomunicazione di risoluzione del contratto; diffidato damagecausato be held responsible ofbenirescue workersattenersi a, rispettareTASK 2: Translate the following phrases sourced from 5) – 6) above1.The landlord initiated proceedings

2.The landlord sought execution of the notice of termination

3.by not complying with the instruction to dismantle the dish, they had failed to maintain good sanitary conditions

TASK 3 - GLOSSARY SYNONYMS

Match the words in bold of the text above with their synonyms

stipulated (a contract)arguedto undertake tolawsuit, suit, legal actionpermissioninfringed(notice of) terminationentered intoproceedingscancellation / withdrawalviolatedauthorizationclaimedshallTASK 4: Continue reading the case and compile the glossaries at the bottom.

TEXT B

8)Shortly after having received the notice of termination, the applicants dismantled the satellite dish. However, in its place they installed a new device by placing on the kitchen floor an iron stand from which an arm, on which the satellite dish was mounted, extended through a small open window. The installation could be pulled back into the kitchen when not being used. At the request of the Tenants' Association, an engineer, Mr S. T., examined the installation on 26 August 2004. He found that it was very stable but recommended that, for safety reasons, a steel wire be fixed between the dish and the stand. The applicants made the recommended addition.

9)The applicants, as well as the other tenants summoned, contested the landlord's claims before the Rent Review Board. They stated that, by mounting satellite dishes for the reception of television programmes, some of which were broadcast in their mother tongues, they were exercising their freedom to receive information, as protected by the Swedish Constitution, Article10 of the Convention and EC law. The landlord's interests had to be balanced against this freedom. The applicants further claimed that they had now complied with the landlord's demand that the earlier satellite installation be dismantled. The new installation was, they claimed, in conformity with the rules of the tenancy agreement. Referring to Mr T.'s opinion, they further maintained that it was safe and did not damage the house.

10)Following an inspection of the applicants' satellite installation, the Rent Review Board gave a decision on 21 October 2004 finding in their favour. The landlord appealed to the Swedish Court of Appeal. The court held an oral hearing and stated that, while the applicants' interest in receiving the broadcasts of the television channels in question had to be taken into consideration, the right to freedom of information relied on did not have such a bearing on the case that it could be considered to have any real importance. Therefore, although their satellite installation did not pose any real safety threat, their interests could not be allowed to override the weighty and reasonable interest of the landlord that order and good custom be upheld. So the decision of the Rent Review Board was overturned.

11)The landlord offered the applicants the option of staying in their flat if they agreed to remove the satellite dish. They did not agree to do this, however, and instead moved on 1 June 2006. They have stated that, largely because of the scarcity of flats for rent in the Stockholm area but also due to there being a court eviction order against them, they were forced to move to Uppsala, approximately 70 km away from Stockholm. As a consequence, the first applicant now had much longer and costlier trips to and from work and the applicants' three children had had to change nursery and school and leave friends.

GLOSSARY SYNONYMS (GROUP 1): Match the words on the left with their synonyms on the right

SummonedClaimContestedSafeguardedClaimsOffsetStatedIssuedExercisingCarried outProtectedConformed toBalancedSuedComplied withEnjoyingDemandAssertedGaveArgumentationsHeldAnswered negatively to

GLOSSARY SYNONYMS (GROUP 2): Match the words on the left with their synonyms on the right

Relied onSupported, defendedBearingCausePosePrevail overOverrideObligedWeightyCancelledUpheldClearance, dispossessionOverturnedRelevanceEvictionImportant, seriousForcedBased onTASK 5: This excerpt contains the final decision of the Court. Read it and compile the Glossaries at the bottom.

TEXT C

A. Damage

56. The applicants claimed 66,000 Swedish kronor (SEK – approximately 6,500 euros (EUR)) in respect of pecuniary damages. Their claim concerned the increased costs of the first applicant's journeys to and from work for a two-year period following their move to Uppsala. In respect of non-pecuniary damages, they claimed SEK 50,000 (about EUR 5,000) each or other amounts which the Court considered reasonable.

57. The (Swedish) Government contested the claim in respect of pecuniary damages, stating that the applicants could have avoided the additional travelling costs by accepting the landlord's offer to remain in the flat. As regards non-pecuniary damages, the Government left the matter to the Court's discretion.

58. The Court considers that the first applicant must have sustained pecuniary damages on account of the longer journeys to and from work and finds this claim reasonable. It therefore awards it in full. Further, the Court finds it appropriate to make an award for non-pecuniary damages. Ruling on an equitable basis, it awards the applicants EUR 5,000 jointly under that head.

B. Costs and expenses

59. The applicants also claimed SEK 229,774 (approximately EUR 22,500) for the costs and expenses incurred after the conclusion of the domestic proceedings. This amount included SEK 216,575 (EUR 21,000) in lawyers' fees for 158 hours of work; the remainder (SEK 12,131) consisting mainly of translation expenses.

60. The Government found the applicants' claims excessive. They maintained that reasonable reimbursement of costs should not exceed SEK 66,000 (EUR 6,500) exclusive of VAT. In addition, SEK 1,000 (EUR 100) was acceptable for expenses.

61. According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only insofar as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum. In the present case, regard being had to the information in its possession and the above criteria, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum of EUR 10,000, inclusive of VAT, covering costs under all heads for the proceedings before the Court.

C.Default interest

62. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

GLOSSARY (TRANSLATIONS): Translate the words underlined in the text above

Pecuniary damagesNon-pecuniary damagesCase-lawAs to quantumHead Default interestProceedingsGLOSSARY (SYNONYMS): Propose synonyms of the words in bold in the text above

Incurred

RemainderSustained(Translation) ExpensesExclusive ofInsofar asIs entitled toProceedings

TASK 6: Consider texts A, B and C above and choose the best option for the following statements:

1.The couple now lives

a.in Oslo, b.in a city "near" Stockholm, c.in their country of origin

2.The controversy arose because of

a.loud TV at night, b.a satellite dish, c.a radio antenna

3.The couple:

a.never complied with any request, b.immediately complied with the removal request, c.partly modified the equipment/tool in question

4.The technician said that the new "equipment" was:

a.not compliant with the standard regulations, b.damaged, c.in need of a more stable fixation

5.The couple claims:

a.that their right to receive information was violated, b.that their right to disseminate information was violated, c.that their right to communicate was violated

6.The controversy:

a.arose when the couple moved to Stockholm, b.arose when the couple was living in Uppsala, c.arose when the Landlord changed

7.The Landlord claims:

a.there are risks of damage to people and things as well as impossibility to enter the apartment in case of emergency, together with aesthetic damage to the house; b.material damage to things and people, damage to the emergency exits, impossibility to communicate with the tentants, c.aesthetic damage to the house, risk of fall of the equipment and damage due to the equipment installation

8.Now the couple: