No beer for judge/Amtsrichter darf im Gerichtsgebäude kein Bier trinken

Fürther Nachrichten reports that the local court judge (Amtsrichter) Werner Schultheiß, who is retiring on April 1, would like to drink beer with his colleagues. Those in charge are not prepared to relax the total ban on alcohol in the Fürth Amtsgericht building, so he is going to court – to the administrative court in Ansbach, where the case will be heard on March 20.

Zum Abschied will Werner Schultheiß (64), Amtsrichter in Fürth, der am 1. April in Pension geht, nicht nur leise Servus sagen, sondern auch mit den Kollegen anstoßen. Das darf er gerne tun – solange in den Gläsern Wasser oder Limo schwappt. Alkohol ist in den Räumen des Amtsgerichts nämlich tabu. Dagegen hat der streitbare Richter Klage eingelegt.

Am 20. März steht nun vor dem Verwaltungsgericht in Ansbach die Verhandlung «gegen den Freistaat Bayern wegen Hausrecht« auf der Tagesordnung. Mit einem Antrag auf eine einstweilige Anordnung will Schultheiß, der am Registergericht tätig ist, ein «Biergebot« durchsetzen.

Dewey & LeBoeuf raspberry via Blackberry / Aber wie war die deutsche Übersetzung?

Above the law reports this exchange by Blackberry at Dewey & Leboeuf:

From: Ralph C. Ferrara
To: DL All Attorneys – US
Cc: Ferrara, Ralph C.
Sent: Mon Dec 17 11:00:29 2007
Subject: German Translation – Completed

Dear All,

Thank you for your many quick responses [to a request for translation of a German document]. The translation has been completed.

Regards, Ralph
______________

From: Stephen A. Best
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:02 AM
To: Ferrara, Ralph C.; DL All Attorneys – US
Subject: Re: German Translation – Completed

Zieg Heil!!!!!!

Sent from my Blackberry Wireless Handheld

This led to great excitement in the comments both there and on The Volokh Conspiracy.

Interesting that you write to all attorneys to get a German translation.

Thanks to Ed. at Blawg Review for the tipoff)

Bloody deed in Bournemouth / Kanzlei lässt Möwen töten

Drei Möwenküken auf dem Dach eines Gebäudes in Bournemouth, an der englischen Südküste, wurden auf Veranlassung von einer Anwaltskanzlei von Schädlingsbekämpfern getötet, zum Leidwesen vieler Zuschauer, u.a. aus einer anderen Kanzlei.

Under the heading Gulls ‘Strangled’ In Front Of Staff, the Bournemouth Daily Echo reports:

STAFF at offices in Bournemouth were left horrified and in tears after watching three seagull chicks killed in front of them because they were deemed a health and safety risk.
The seagull family lived on the roof of Harold G Walker solicitors in Oxford Road, Bournemouth, and the young chicks had become favourites among staff in surrounding buildings.

Apparently members of the Crown Prosecution Service were watching too.
The story was also taken up by the Law Society Gazette and RollOnFriday (the latter writes ‘No-one mention the hawk in Broadgate’, but that would be the perfect antidote, of course).

The commenters on the Daily Echo are incensed and will not use the services of Harold G Walker in future. One writes (my emphasis):

What Harold Walker has failed to grasp is the impact on the people who have witnessed this incident as it was carried out in an unprofessional manner. ProKill are incorrest to quote that they followed the guidelines as I would like to know where DEFRA state that you are allowed to stamp on a birds head. I would like to add that we are not talking once ,but for several moments so death did not come quickly to the creature, and to add insult to injury to wave at the staff who had come out of their offices in shock is just unbelievable.

There is a certain escalation in the comments.

A Dürrenmatt sentence / Dürrenmatt übersetzen

Sasha Volokh had a query about the meaning of a Dürrenmatt sentence, or rather part of one, yesterday (the Ed. of Blawgreview alerted me to it) – I’ve indicated the problem part in bold:

[A]uch ich habe eine Kunsttheorie, was macht einem nicht alles Spaß, doch halte ich sie als meine private Meinung zurück (ich müßte mich sonst gar nach ihr richten) und gelte lieber als ein etwas verwirrter Naturbursche mit mangelndem Formwillen.

It looks as if Sasha suspected the correct meaning, which was different from a published translation. I think the exchange is a good example of the difficulty of talking about language and translation. Some people seem to have no awareness of how slight their grasp of grammar is, though.

Judicial dress again/ Richterroben

Following the recent entry on changes to court dress in England and Wales, RA-Blog gives a link to a page with pictures of judicial dress all over the world.

It’s not quite accurate when referring to England and Wales – not surprisingly, since the situation is so complicated. And in England and Wales, ‘justices’ doesn’t refer to judges, but to lay magistrates.

>>Like everything else in Britain, British judicial costumes are regulated according to a myriad of ancient traditions, customs, and laws. Many of these rules date back to at least the 14th Century, making the modern British judicial system one of the world’s oldest.<< Does their dress date back that far? I don't think wigs were worn then. And what happened to 1066? I can't speak for Scotland and Northern Ireland (the page has separate pictures for Scotland later). >>The British judicial branch is very complex, and is composed of dozens of different courts of jurisdiction<< Not dozens. >> with grandiose names like the “Queen’s Bench” the “Chancery Division” and the “Crown Court.” Depending on which branch the judge belongs to, he could wear one of many different costumes. Unlike many other countries which limit their judges to wearing only red or black, in Britain judges wear almost every color. There are judges with blue robes, green robes, white robes, and even purple and pink ones. << I haven't checked the number of colours, but I have my doubts. >>There are several constants, however. All upper court justices in Britain wear the famous “full bottomed” powdered wigs while lower court judges wear the shorter “barrister” wig. << The full-bottomed wig is only for ceremonial occasions. In court they wear the bench wig - except the House of Lords judges, who don't wear wigs at all. On wigs, see earlier entry.

>>This is a holdover from the time when judges were members of the aristocracy, and it was considered fashionable for important people to show off their social status by wearing long flowing wigs. Once a year there is a special ceremony in Westminster Abbey during which all of the nation’s judges assemble to commemorate the start of the legal year. On formal occasions such as that, all judges wear “full bottomed” wigs.<< Exactly, and not on other occasions. The ceremony referred to is the Lord Chancellor's Breakfast. The picture of "more high court judges" with purple trim and full-bottomed wigs is a picture of the procession to the Lord Chancellor's Breakfast. Those are not high court judges, but circuit judges. By the way, the 'cross collar' is called 'bands'. For lots of pictures, including circuit judges in ordinary and ceremonial dress, see the wonderful PDF Legal Habits.

Another mystery to me is the picture that says ‘A lower court judge’. I don’t know what a lower court judge is supposed to mean – it can only mean a circuit judge (not a district judge, I think), and I don’t think it’s one of those. (The term ‘upper court’ quoted earlier is also dubious). I think it’s another manifestation of a high court judge. Here it is – any offers?

uk2.jpg

I’ve got a bit inured to English court dress, so I find the German Federal Constitutional Court judges the oddest. Their hats could have been designed for 2001. And I believe when they were invented, a theatrical costumier was consulted.

Court dress simplified/Richterbekleidung vereinfacht

The Solicitors Journal reports that from January 2008, judges’ clothing in England and Wales is to be simplified and their dress allowance reduced. This was announced on July 12. Media release here.

Judges will no longer wear wigs, wing collars and bands when sitting in open court in civil and family proceedings. The Circuit Bench, in accordance with their current wish, will continue to wear the same gown. All other judges will wear a new, simple, gown which is in the course of desigm-

In criminal proceedings, High Court Judges will wear the present winter robes. At the moment, High Court Judges have five different styles of dress for different situations.

Advocates (mostly barristers but some solicitors) will similarly not wear wigs, wing collars and bands in civil courts.

For a picture of the High Court Judge dress to remain, see earlier entry.

Wikipedia has some information on current court dress. Examples with pictures here.

The judges of the House of Lords wear no wigs and gowns, just dark suits. That is apparently because they are sitting as a committee of the House of Lords rather than a court in the usual sense.

Corrections by customers / Kundenkorrektur

ck’s comment on a recent entry warrants more discussion so I reproduce it here:

Dieser Gedanke “I will be more likely to devise some rules of etiquette and consider how to phrase comments to the author, rather than seguing into a rant about stupid foreigners who think they can write English.” sollte irgendwie standardisiert werden. Zu einem aus dem Deutschen uebersetzten Vertrag machte ich mir kuerzlich diese Gedanken, die gegenueber dem Uebersetzer hoffentlich fair sind:
“Zunaechst ist der englische Text fuer den amerikanischen Juristen sowie Gerichte, Schiedsgerichte und die Geschworenen im Zivilprozess nicht verstaendlich. Das gilt bei einzelnen Passagen ganz besonders, aber im Ergebnis auch fuer den gesamten Vertrag.
Dabei will ich nicht die Uebersetzerarbeit kritisieren. Die amerikanische Juristensprache ist schon fuer Amerikaner schlimm genug. Fast kein Uebersetzer kann bei der Uebersetzung von Begriffen aus einer Sprache in die andere auch die hinter jedem Begriff stehenden Rechtsbedeutungen kennen. Um der rechtlichen Bedeutung jeden Begriffs gerecht zu werden, muesste der Uebersetzer ja auch den Vertrag umschreiben.”
Ist das fair? Wieviel Toleranz haben Uebersetzer fuer die Kommentierung ihrer Arbeit durch Anwaelte? Wenn Anwaelte und Uebersetzer unabhaengig voneinander fuer einen Auftraggeber arbeiten, kann sich die Arbeit verdoppeln. Wenn sie zusammenarbeiten – oder dem Anwalt zumindest mitgeteilt wird, ob der Vertrag von einem Uebersetzer uerbersetzt wurde oder nur einen Versuch darstellt, einen Vertrag auf Englisch zu verfassen -, lassen sich einige Probleme vermeiden.

I can’t have made myself clear. I was referring to corrections of guides to churches and castles, where the correction contains wrong grammar. For instance, I once had my name omitted from a brochure where I had written (rather stiffly) ‘The boot [a bootmaker’s diploma work] has a height of 2 m’ and this was changed by the author into ‘The boot has a high of 2 m’, on the assumption that I couldn’t write English. The example ck refers to, where a lawyer, who may be a German who has lived in the USA for a long time, corrects the translator’s knowledge of English law. That is certainly not what I meant by a native speaker being corrected by a non-native – in fact I don’t see the connection.

So, what does a translator think if a lawyer corrects the translator’s legal English?

I don’t know! My legal English is sometimes corrected by German lawyers. Indeed, I can well imagine that they change whatever they like and don’t report back to me. After all, the translations aren’t often published. And I can’t remember getting a comment on the few occasions when my work was received by an English lawyer.

There surely might be problems. ck is thinking of using terms appropriate for a U.S. lawyer or layperson. I might not have the right ones for an English lawyer or layperson. My translations go to more than one country and not just to native speakers of English. That’s why I was interested in the presentation referred to. If I suddenly started translating regularly for people solely in the England and Wales legal system, I think I would have to be broken in. I would have to be grateful for any correction.

But what do they want? Examples, ck? I have a feeling I would be wanted to translate Rechtsanwalt as solicitor and Kläger as claimant. I am afraid there would be cases where I would not be happy about this. Much as I like to do a lot of what the customer wants, there is a limit to how many specialized vocabularies I can keep apart.

NEW/Website für Notare in England und Wales

NEW, NotaryTalk of England and Wales, is a website/forum run by Gregory Taylor, a notary public, not a scrivener notary. There are sections for links, news, German, French and Spanish pages and much more. A large number of articles both introduce the various notary professions and current problems. An important topic is the potential recognition of notaries from England and Wales in Europe.

I have had a few entries on notaries in the past – search for ‘notary’ in the blog. Not long after I started this blog in 2003, I went to a conference where I encountered Spanish-speaking lawyer-translators from South America who did not believe me when I told them about scrivener notaries in the UK.

This and that/Vermischtes

A combination of a lot of work interspersed with photography walks in between has led to a pile of photos of Fürth and not much else. Since that is not the main purpose of this blog, here are a few things other people have been doing:

Céline reports on Phil Gyford’s beginner’s guide to freelancing with links.

languagehat presents an orthographically defective Financial Times article about the German Idiotenapostroph (known to me as the Deppenapostroph). Good pictures at www.deppenapostroph.de

A video of an elephant seeing itself in a mirror is linked in this New Scientist article (via rebecca’s pocket). Stranger than seeing oneself in a mirror for the first time: these elephants may see themselves once and never again, I suppose.

The Times (Water Cooler) reports on Mark Herrmann, The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, quoting him on the Blackberry:

Whenever a group of people meets, two acts of rudeness now routinely occur. First, people not only receive, but take, and talk on, cellphone calls. Second, Blackberries buzz and people type responsive messages. We did not tolerate this flagrant disrespect in the past century, and we should not tolerate it in this one.
Incredibly, I have heard people say that they won’t buy a BlackBerry because BlackBerries make people rude; BlackBerries make people stop paying attention at meetings. I have news for you: Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.

I think it’s time someone invented the Raspberry.

Handakte WebLAWg reports that a fourth Act to repeal outdated provisions has been passed in Bavaria. Here it is, and here are some extracts:

29. das Gesetz über die behälterlose unterirdische Speicherung von Gas vom 25. Oktober 1966 (GVBl S. 335, BayRS 750-31-W), zuletzt geändert durch § 18 des Ge-setzes vom 24. Juli 1974 (GVBl S. 354),
30. das Gesetz über den Übergang der bayerischen Wasserstraßen auf das Reich vom 23. September 1921 (BayRS 753-9-4-W),
31. Art. 6 bis 46 des Gesetzes über die Ausübung und Ablösung des Weiderechtes auf fremdem Grund und Boden (BayRS 7817-1-L), geändert durch § 58 des Gesetzes vom 24. April 2001 (GVBl. S. 140),
32. die Verordnung über die Anpflanzung wurzelechter Reben vom 25. August 1966 (BayRS 7821-1-L),
33. das Gesetz über den Hufbeschlag vom 20. Dezember 1940 (BayRS 7824-9-L),

Werner Siebers presents a photo of a Berlin law firm advertising by bicycle.

By the way, I see the firm with the bike ad uses a picture of hands on its site. There are some odd pictures of hands used on the Web in this way, which should perhaps remain anonymous:

hands1.jpg

hands2.jpg