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.
Cookie settings
potence de sécurisation des clefs
"BS" (here)

Glossary entry

French term or phrase:

insusceptible d\'être couverte

English translation:

cannot be remedied

Added to glossary by cmf33
Apr 20, 2017 12:05
7 yrs ago
4 viewers *
French term

insusceptible d'être couverte

French to English Law/Patents Law (general)
Hi everyone,

Just wondering how you would translate 'insusceptible d'être couverte' here (see below for fuller context)?:

"XXXX soulève la nullité de fond de ces déclarations d’appel, insusceptible d’être couverte"

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated - thanks!
Proposed translations (English)
4 +2 cannot be remedied
3 insusceptible of annulment
Change log

Apr 22, 2017 13:41: Yolanda Broad changed "Term asked" from "insusceptible d\\\'être couverte" to "insusceptible d\'être couverte "

Discussion

Germaine Apr 21, 2017:
François, "Couvrir une enchère" ce n'est pas l'annuler; c'est surenchérir:
http://www.linternaute.com/expression/langue-francaise/17895...
Francois Boye Apr 21, 2017:
couvrir une erreur ou une faute; couvrir une enchère: these are the wo expressions I have in mind. In the first expression, couvrir means to hide or to protect; in the second, it means to discard or to annul.

I lean, of corse, towards the second expression. Hence I said couvrir = to annul like a bid eliminated by another one.
Germaine Apr 21, 2017:
François, Essayez de comprendre la différence entre la forme et l'effet: en français, on annule une chose valide. Par exemple:
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&es...

(et notez ces SEULES occurrences de votre proposition au passage). En français, on n'annule pas une annulation; ça n'a aucun sens. En anglais non plus - comme vous l'indique AllegroTrans. Just as you won't add an addition or color the colors.
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 21, 2017:
reading of "couvrir" Try reading "couvrir" as if it meant one were able to "cover" one's tracks in the event of having made a mistake. Then it can start to make sense. If not declared nul by operation of the law, then there is the possibility of being able to "cover" up having messed up, by either taking remedial action or by agreeing that it should in fact remain nul and void.

Confirming a nullity that exists already is not the same as saying that "couvrir" means "to annul".
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 21, 2017:
@François François, I agree that the meaning of « couvrir » is clear. But I disagree entirely that it means “to annul”. Once again, the very source you cite indicates that is not the case:
“'Lorsque la nullité n'est pas "de droit" elle peut être couverte, ce qui permet à l'auteur de l'acte nul, de le recommencer ou de le confirmer. »
Thus, « When the nullity is not de jure, it can be remedied, which enables the author of the nul deed (document/action ?) to start again (= take corrective action) or to confirm it (= confirm that the act (document/action)) remain nul.”

If the action/doc in question is not a nullity by operation of the law, then its author gets a second chance. He can start again and get it right this time round ("le recommencer") or go ahead and confirm that it is in fact a nullity ("le confirmer"). If he confirms the act, he confirms that it is nul and void. So, on the one hand, if the nullity is de jure, it remains as a nullity "insusceptible d'être couverte". On the other hand, if it is not de jure, it is "susceptible" of being "couverte" (by starting again, or agreeing to leave it as a nullity). In this instance it was a nullity ab initio as not a legally constitued c°.
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 21, 2017:
@AT Yes, you're right. I'm just a little at pains to make things as clear as I can for the meaning of "couvir une nullité". From the outset, I have read this as eamning that "couvrir" means to offer an opportunity for correction. The point in this instance is that this opportunity (=remedy) is not available as the company in question was not legally constituted, (hors jeu dès le départ)!
AllegroTrans Apr 21, 2017:
Nikki Courts 'set aside' orders, but not situations, such as the invalidity of a notice of appeal, as implied here. I think this text is saying the situation cannot be remedied: I have also heard judges use the term 'incurable'. In the context here, I think the text is saying "there is no remedy", i.e. there is a fatal flaw, which could be one of a number of things (e.g. the court lacks jurisdiction, the appeal is out of time, the appeal is statute-barred, etc. etc.)
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 21, 2017:
@François Good morning François,
Three points:
i) When you look at the definition you have cited from my post, you have overlooked an important detail : "couvrir une nullité, c'est l'écarter par une espèce de fin de non-recevoir..". It is not a "fin de non-recevoir" but has a similar effect. "Couvrir une nullité" means to set aside the nullity ("l'écarter"), a bit like a "fin de non-recevoir". That is not to say it is a "fin de non-recevoir";
ii) The other important point is that this is in the negative "insusceptible". Thus, the nullity cannot be set aside;
iii) The reference to "fin de non-recevoir" is helpful. However, it is important to remeber that this is about "couvrir une nullité" and not about "couvrir une fin de non-recevoir". That said, check and compare the meanings. In either case, "couvrir" is described as "l'écarter" either the "nullité" or the "fin de non recevoir". And in this case, again, it is about that not being possible.

Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 21, 2017:
@ph-b Thanks for your reply here, my sollicitation being rather for your general thoughts and comments, rather than and agree/disagree, etc. If my suggestion and references seem plausible to someone else, then it may work for the Asker. It is easy to convincce oneself of something, to remain in closed-circuit thought processes and overlook something extremely obvious. So thank you.
ph-b (X) Apr 21, 2017:
Hello Nikki Thank you for inviting me to comment on your post. I posted about nullité couverte early in the discussion when participants were wondering what couverte was referring to and my instinct as a native speaker was that nullité was the answer. But I’d rather not comment on your post (or any other, for that matter) as insusceptible d’être couverte isn't clear to me, even though it looks as if you might well be on to something. Indeed, I do my very best to stay away from les questions de procédure (I can always call a magistrate friend if I get stuck but contracts keep me happy and busy anyway) and an ‘agree’ from me would not be safe from my/your/cmf33's point of view. This said, your answer sounds convincing.
Francois Boye Apr 21, 2017:
http://thelawdictionary.org/fin-de-non-recevoir/
AllegroTrans Apr 20, 2017:
@ Francois Courts do not "annul nullity" or "dismiss nullity" - this is simply not the language of legal procedure. Google the terms and you will not get meaningful hits.
Francois Boye Apr 20, 2017:
@ Nikki
Your translation is inadequate. Why? Fin de non-recevoir = Bar or dismissal or annulment. It does not mean declaring that the nullity or voidance in question is without remedy. Instead, it means that the nullity is question must be dismissed or annulled

Couvrir une nullité, c'est l'écarter par une espece de fin de non - recevoir; ce qui arrive lorsque celui qui pouvoit débattre de nullité un exploit, jugement, ou acte, a approuvé cet acte, & a procédé volontairement en conséquence.
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 20, 2017:
@ph-b I agree that this is about the "nullité" being "couverte". "Couvrir une nullité" has a special meaning. I look forward to any comments on my post.
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 20, 2017:
@François 2/2 Your third source does indicate that "insusceptible" (adj.) can take "of" or "to". So thank you for that; I did not know. A quick search on Google "(in)susceptible of vs. to" suggests that "of" is little used.
“Insusceptible of” sounds better with a verb than followed by a noun, thus “insusceptible of being annulled”. However, “couvrir une nullité” is about correcting something that has already been annulled, so it would be a mistranslation here. Yes, with corrections (“insusceptible of being corrected”), your suggestion could work from a grammatical point of view, but my searches suggest that “insusceptible” is not used in this type of context.
Nikki Scott-Despaigne Apr 20, 2017:
@François 1/2 I don't think that "couvert" means annulled. "Couvrir une nulliité" is an expression with a particular meaning. It is about correcting something that has been declared nul and void, a corrective measure, a solution to the problem of nullity, a remedy. See my post, where one of the explanations of the expression describes “couvrir” as having a sense of “régulariser”.
You say your first reference shows that “couvert” means annulled, nul and void. I beg to differ. At the end of that source, the phrase "On retiendra toutefois que cet accord ne pourra pas couvrir la nullité du préavis", it is clear that the matter turns on the fact that the "accord" cannot correct the nullity of the notice. In fact, it looks as though “couvrir une nullité” is not about giving rise to a nullity but how to correct an existing one.
Of your second reference, I looked at a few of the pages, but found nothing convincing to support your suggestion. You might wish to point to a specific URL and/or extract.
philgoddard Apr 20, 2017:
I don't know if you've seen this. The answer looks like it may be on the right lines, but I'm not sure:
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/nullité-couverte.323...
ph-b (X) Apr 20, 2017:
nullité couverte Lorsque la nullité n'est pas « de droit » elle peut être couverte, ce qui permet à l'auteur de l'acte nul, de le recommencer ou de le confirmer.<p>https://www.dictionnaire-juridique.com/definition/nullite.ph...
cmf33 (asker) Apr 20, 2017:
I think 'couverte' is referring to 'la nullité' - I don't think that there's an 's' missing from the word - but I'm not really sure how to phrase this. 'XXX' refers to the company. XXX is responding to notices of appeal. Here's a bit more of the phrase, if it helps at all:
XXXX soulève la nullité de fond de ces déclarations d’appel, insusceptible d’être couverte, en ce que la société XXX telle qu’elle figure dans ces actes n’a pas d’existence légale et en ce que les dispositions de l’article 58 du code de procédure civile ne sont pas respectées
philgoddard Apr 20, 2017:
I agree. I'm also not clear what "couverte" refers to. XXX? Nullité? Or is it déclarations, and there are some Ss missing?
AllegroTrans Apr 20, 2017:
Asker I think we need more context here. Is XXXX the respondent to an appeal and is this part of his/her submissions in reply? "Covered" implies something such as "covered by the rules/law/provisons etc." Can you tell from your document what this may be referring to?

Proposed translations

+2
6 hrs
French term (edited): insusceptible d\'être couverte
Selected

cannot be remedied

There is a substantive nullity that cannot be remedied as XXX is not a bona fide company and art. 58 CPC has not been complied with.
What we know :
- XXX is not in fact a bona fide company;
- the provisions of art. 58 of the CPC have not been complied with.
What we need to know (Notions clés ? : fond/forme, couvrir une nullité) :
- fond : substance (substantive)
- forme : procedure (procedural)
- nullité : nullity
- couvrir une nullité : repair a nullity

(a) nullité : (EN :”nullity”)
https://www.dictionnaire-juridique.com/definition/nullite.ph...
« La nullité est la sanction de l'invalidité d'un acte juridique, ou d'une procédure. soit que la cause de la nullité réside dans l'absence de l'utilisation d'une forme précise qui est légalement imposée, soit qu'elle résulte de l'absence d'un élément indispensable à son efficacité…. »

http://thelawdictionary.org/nullity/ What is NULLITY?
Nothing ; no proceeding ; an act or proceeding in a cause which the op- posite party may treat as though it had not taken place, or which lias absolutely no legal force or effect. Salter v. Hilgen, 40 Wis. 363; .Tenness v. Lapeer County Circuit Judge, 42 Mich. 460, 4 N. W. 220; Johnson v. Dines, 61 Md. 122.

(b) couvrir (une nullité)
http://www.notrefamille.com/dictionnaire/definition/couvrir/
« Sens 8
Effacer, réparer, en parlant des fautes, des manquements. Une amnistie a couvert ce délit. Un mariage subséquent couvre le défaut de naissance des enfants.
Terme de pratique. Couvrir la prescription, l'interrompre. Couvrir une nullité, l'écarter de manière qu'elle ne puisse plus être opposée. »

http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/getobject_?a.27:18./var/artf...
“Couvrir une fin de non- recevoir, c'est la parer, l'écarter de manière qu'elle ne peut plus être opposée. La fin de non - recevoir que l'on pouvoit opposer au demandeur est couverte, lorsque le défendeur a procédé volontairement au fond sans opposer la fin de non - recevoir, & sans qu'elle ait été reservée par aucun jugement: c'est pourquoi l'ordonnance de 1667, tit. v. art. 5. veut que l'on employe dans les défenses les fins de non - recevoir, nullité des exploits, ou autres exceptions péremptoires, si aucunes y a, pour y être préalablement fait droit.

Couvrir une nullité, c'est l'écarter par une espece de fin de non - recevoir; ce qui arrive lorsque celui qui pouvoit débattre de nullité un exploit, jugement, ou acte, a approuvé cet acte, & a procédé volontairement en conséquence. Voyez ce qui est dit dans l'article précédent.”
Essential legal bits ‘n’ bobs : (art 115 CPC)
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte...
Code de procédure civile
• Livre Ier : Dispositions communes à toutes les juridictions
o Titre V : Les moyens de défense.
 Chapitre II : Les exceptions de procédure.
 Section IV : Les exceptions de nullité.
 Sous-section I : La nullité des actes pour vice de forme.
Article 115
La nullité est couverte par la régularisation ultérieure de l'acte si aucune forclusion n'est intervenue et si la régularisation ne laisse subsister aucun grief.

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte...
For art. 58 of the CPC.




--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2017-04-20 19:23:53 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Here's a suggested rendering, but a very literal one :

"XXXX soulève la nullité de fond de ces déclarations d’appel, insusceptible d’être couverte, en ce que la société XXX telle qu’elle figure dans ces actes n’a pas d’existence légale et en ce que les dispositions de l’article 58 du code de procédure civile ne sont pas respectées"

Literally,

"XXX raises the nullity of the substance (underlying) the appeal statements, for which there is no remedy, as XXX, such as it appears in the deeds is not a bona fide company and as the provisions of article 58 of the CPC have not been complied with.”


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 10 hrs (2017-04-20 22:32:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

(Comma : "deeds, is not...")


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 19 hrs (2017-04-21 08:03:50 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

To follow on from a reply below, this may clarify my reading. François comments are helpful. He highlights the fact that "couvrir" is used in the same way for a "fin de non-recevoir" (FdNR).

"Couvrir" means to set aside the nullity ("l'écarter par une espèce de FdNR"). "Couvrir une FdNR" also exists. Compare and you will see that "couvrir" means "écarter", set aside.

The source text is about a "nullité... insusceptible d'être covuerte", thus a nullity that in insusceptible of being set aside.
One would be hard pushed to find an English speaking lawyer using "insusceptible" here rather than "cannot". I have been unable to find one single instance of its use in this type of context.



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 20 hrs (2017-04-21 08:06:41 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I suggest "nullity...cannot be set aside" is probably more useful that "remedied". It depends whether you think it is specifically about setting aside or more generally about any available remedy.
Peer comment(s):
agree AllegroTrans : I am 98% sure this is the meaning; also "irremediable"
4 hrs
neutral Francois Boye : This is the definition: Couvrir une nullité, c'est l'écarter par une espece de fin de non - recevoir; ce qui arrive lorsque celui qui pouvoit débattre de nullité un exploit, jugement, ou acte, a approuvé cet acte, & a procédé volontairement en conséquence
4 hrs
Quite. "Couvrir" means to set aside the nullity (like an "espèce de" FdNR). "Couvrir une FdNR" also exists. Compare and you will see that "couvrir" means "écarter", set aside. See add. post. and generally "to remedy", specifically here "to s. aside"?
agree Germaine : remedy of the nullity : couverture de nullité - http://iate.europa.eu
20 hrs
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Thanks for all your references and your explanation; this definition seems to make the most sense in the context"
5 hrs
French term (edited): insusceptible d\'être couverte

insusceptible of annulment

According to the attachment, couvert means annulled, declared nul and void


https://commyounity1.wordpress.com/2016/12/02/le-travailleur...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 hrs (2017-04-20 18:31:15 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

See the expression 'insusceptible of' in this webpage:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=insusceptible of annulment&for...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 10 hrs (2017-04-20 22:31:08 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/insusceptible

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 10 hrs (2017-04-20 22:33:55 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

This paragraph is crystal-clear in French. It indicates that 'couvrir' = to annul in English

'Lorsque la nullité n'est pas "de droit" elle peut être couverte, ce qui permet à l'auteur de l'acte nul, de le recommencer ou de le confirmer. On comprend dès lors qu'ait été cassé l'arrêt d'une Cour d'appel qui avait rejeté une exception de nullité sans rechercher si la nullité invoquée était une nullité relative alors que seule une telle qualification la rendait inopposable en cas d'exécution de l'obligation découlant de l'acte (1ère chambre civile, 20 mai 2009, pourvoi : 08-13018 BICC n°711 du 15 novembre 2009 et Legifrance). Voir aussi, 1ère Civ., 13 février 2007, pourvoi n°05-18. 097, Bull. 2007, I, n°97.:'

Source: Le Dictionnaire Juridique


Peer comment(s):
neutral AllegroTrans : "insusceptible of" is not a valid construction in this context// even if it is, the phrase makes absolutely no legal sense in the context
12 mins
see above
neutral Nikki Scott-Despaigne : In the OUP ref, the "insusceptibility" (the lack of capacity, here, to be affected by) is describing how chickens cannot be infected by the Trypanosoma parasite. The noun works with "of" there; the adj. does not work with "of" here.//See Discussion post.
1 hr
forget about that one! see my third attachment
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search