Nov 12, 2015 13:13
8 yrs ago
56 viewers *
French term
nantissement
French to English
Law/Patents
Law (general)
Articles of association
This term is generally translated as \"pledge\", as is the term \"gage\". Both terms are used in this text and there is a clear distinction between the two concepts. Further research into this issue had led me to the Wikipedia entry on the legal term \"pledge\" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_(law)), which says the French legal system retains a distinction between possessory pledge (i.e. delivered from the outset), which it states is "gage" in old French. and non-possessory pledge (i.e. distrained on the maturity date). Confusingly, that is the opposite of my understanding of the wording of my text...
In view of all this, how do you translate \"nantissement\"?
Nantissement d\'actions
Les associés ayant nanti leurs actions continuent de représenter seuls les actions par eux remises en gage.
In view of all this, how do you translate \"nantissement\"?
Nantissement d\'actions
Les associés ayant nanti leurs actions continuent de représenter seuls les actions par eux remises en gage.
Proposed translations
(English)
4 +1 | ...who have pledged their shares as collateral... |
Rebecca Davis
![]() |
5 | pledging |
Adiel Stephenson
![]() |
3 | pledge |
Alain Bolduc
![]() |
3 | charging of co. shares; lien (if attaching by operation of law) |
Adrian MM. (X)
![]() |
Proposed translations
+1
2 mins
Selected
...who have pledged their shares as collateral...
Could it be something like this in this context?
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 28 mins (2015-11-12 13:41:40 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Could you translate remise en gage as "granted as security?" I don't see where it says that they will only have voting rights to these...
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 28 mins (2015-11-12 13:41:40 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Could you translate remise en gage as "granted as security?" I don't see where it says that they will only have voting rights to these...
Note from asker:
Yes, except that if it did, the source text would read something like this: "Shareholders who have pledged their shares as collateral only continued to represent (i.e. have voting rights for) the shares they have pledged as collateral." |
Leaving aside the failure to distinguish between "nantissement" and "gage", that does not make sense to my mind: why would shareholders only have voting rights in relation to the shares they had pledged as collateral and not to the ones they had retained possession of? |
I understand "représenter... les actions" as a reference to voting rights, mainly because they are referred to in the previous paragraph. |
Peer comment(s):
agree |
philgoddard
: I'm not sure this answers the question, but it is a correct translation of "ayant nanti leurs actions".
4 hrs
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thanks"
3 hrs
pledge
As mentionned in you post concerning the term gage, I believe the difference is the following:
Nantissement = the pledge itself
Gage = what is securing the pledge.
Nantissement = the pledge itself
Gage = what is securing the pledge.
Example sentence:
Partners having pledged their shares retain voting rights over the assets provided as security.
3 hrs
French term (edited):
nantissement d'actions
charging of co. shares; lien (if attaching by operation of law)
Les associés ayant nanti leurs actions continuent de représenter seuls les actions par eux remises en gage >
suggested translation: members/shareholders who have *charged* their shares continue representing on their own the (registered/nominatives?) shares they have handed over as security (collateralised).
Mortgage is the EN co. law term of art and that would denote a transfer of the registered share certificates to the mortgagee.
In this case, I guess the gage is being used as a sub-species of a nantissement. A charge would IMO cover this scenario.
I doubt the sharholders have lost the right to vote over shares they have retained possession of - rather, they vote jointly with any chargee or beneficial owner (usufruitier).
FHS Bridge: nantissement> bill of sale (of goods)
nantissement sur le fonds de commerce > charge on a business
Adrian MM. formerly known as Kirsty MacC
suggested translation: members/shareholders who have *charged* their shares continue representing on their own the (registered/nominatives?) shares they have handed over as security (collateralised).
Mortgage is the EN co. law term of art and that would denote a transfer of the registered share certificates to the mortgagee.
In this case, I guess the gage is being used as a sub-species of a nantissement. A charge would IMO cover this scenario.
I doubt the sharholders have lost the right to vote over shares they have retained possession of - rather, they vote jointly with any chargee or beneficial owner (usufruitier).
FHS Bridge: nantissement> bill of sale (of goods)
nantissement sur le fonds de commerce > charge on a business
Adrian MM. formerly known as Kirsty MacC
Reference:
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/french_to_english/law_patents/586695-nantissement_des_parts.html
1 day 9 hrs
pledging
Translation:
Pledging of shares
Any partners who have pledged their shares shall continue to be the sole representatives of the shares thus pledged.
You don't need to differentiate between nantissement and gage here. By the way, don't translate associés as shareholders, because this isn't a company limited by shares, but a limited partnership, with partners or "members".
Pledging of shares
Any partners who have pledged their shares shall continue to be the sole representatives of the shares thus pledged.
You don't need to differentiate between nantissement and gage here. By the way, don't translate associés as shareholders, because this isn't a company limited by shares, but a limited partnership, with partners or "members".
Discussion
Nantissement d'actions
Les associés ayant nanti leurs actions continuent de représenter seuls les actions par eux remises en gage.
[partners/shareholders ... who have pledged their shares as collateral ] remain the only one to represent these shares
IOW creditors who have a lien on these shares still have no say whatsoever in the running of the business.
Basically it's akin to saying you may give you house as a collateral for a loan, but are still the only one who has the right to live in it.
the main point of the clause is in "continuent de représenter seuls", i.e. even if a creditor holds these shares as collateral it will have no say whatsoever in running the business - the main point is in keeping control of the company - so getting exactly right the translation for "seuls" is far more important then agonising between possessory and non-possessory pledges. ST only says these shares have been used by the shareholder as as collateral for a loan, nothing more.
This seems to be a quite standard clause in many Articles of association, there must umpteen translations available ...
J'avais l'impression que c'était ce dont il s'agissait ici: d'un entiercement (plutôt que d'une mise en gage), d'autant qu'on parle de statuts constitutifs. "Nantir les parts" aurait alors le sens de payer leur prix de souscription (nantir la société du prix de leurs parts) et "remise en gage"= deposited in escrow.
Vérification faite sur Legifrance, il s'avère que les Français nantissent les créances (et non les créanciers - on nantit quelqu'un en/de qlqe chose, cf. http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/nantir ) et l'on trouve entre autres, dans le cas de statuts de certaines sociétés civiles immobilières, des règles sur le nantissement des parts sociales (sigh...). Notons aussi que le ministère de l'Économie et des Finances (Paris) traduit "nantir des valeurs" par "pawn securities" (!) (http://gdt.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/)