Neither execute nor deliver are problem words in translation – at least not when found separately. Execute will typically mean one of two things:
1) to have a contract signed by someone with authority to do so; or
2) to perform or complete a contract or duty.
Deliver, when found alone, will also either indicate one of two things:
1) that an instrument is to be physically delivered (i.e. to take or hand over to someone); or
2) nothing at all.
Allow me to elaborate on this latter point. In concluding clauses of contracts that will not actually be physically delivered, the word delivered is just a fossilized term. It’s something we continue to write in our contracts even though times have changed and the entire transaction may be done online. And, of course, that’s where the translation problem originates.
Let’s look at the following example:
This agreement and the New Warrants have been duly executed and delivered by the Company.
As Adams points out, this is...
Dates, believe it or not, are not necessarily a simple thing to translate. First, there’s the matter of convention. If you’re translating into English, for example, the U.K. and the U.S. use different formats. While American lawyers are used to seeing the month-day-year format (as in May 20, 2019), their counterparts on the other side of the pond are far more accustomed to the day-month-year format (as in 20 May 2019). And if you’re working into other European languages, you may want to use the day-month-year format as well, but what if that language is Spanish? Spaniards are used to the European way, as are Argentinians, but Mexicans are used to the American way. The rule of thumb then in contract translation is that dates should be localized. Easy-peasy, right, provided you know where the contract is going to be used, which is information translators don’t always have access to, especially when they work with agencies or large LSPs.
But that’s not the...