el perito abajo firmante declara no estar incurso en ninguno de los supuestos de recusación

Discussion in 'Legal Terminology' started by maximummax, Sep 21, 2007.

  1. maximummax New Member

    colombia english
    Por favor, si alguien me puede ayudar con esta frase:

    El perito abajo firmante declara no estar incurso en ninguno de los supuestos de recusación, incompatibilidad o tacha definidos en el artículo...
    Gracias.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  2. maximummax New Member

    colombia english
    OK, then.

    The expert who has signed below declares that he is not involved in any kind of accusation, ? or has some kind of blemish on his record as set down by law...
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  3. fsabroso

    fsabroso Moderadiólogo

    South Texas
    Perú / Castellano
    Hola Maximummax:

    ¡Bienvenido(a) a WR!

    Tu hilo a sido movido al foro de términos legales.

    Usé la herramienta de búsqueda del foro para la palabra "recusación" y encontré este hilo:
    http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=381986
    Donde lo traducen como "recusal", y encontré esta definición:
    Hicé lo mismo con "incurso" y me dio este hilo:
    http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=166102
    Donde lo traducen como "to be held in".
    Además encontré la definición de "incur", quizás te sirva:
    Para la traducción de "supuestos", en el diccionario de WR hay varios hilos donde se ha discutido la palabra:
    http://www.wordreference.com/es/translation.asp?v=pop&tranword=supuestos

    Saludos.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  4. David Senior Member

    El perito abajo firmante declara no estar incurso en ninguno de los supuestos de recusación, incompatibilidad o tacha definidos en el artículo...

    I read the threads suggested by the moderator, but they do not explain in any way that I think would be helpful.

    The undersigned expert declares that he is not engaged in any of the practices that would require his recusal or disqualification, or would taint [his opinions].
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  5. ampurdan

    ampurdan Modstachioed modnster

    jiā tàiluó ní yà
    Català & español (Spain)
    It's not only about practices the expert might be engaged in, it's also about other situations, such as posts he holds or personal relations or connections he has with the case, etc. I guess these things would be disclosed through an expert witness "voir dire" in common law system countries.

    The idea of it is that he declares that there is no reason to challenge his testimony as an expert witness.
     
  6. JanetF Senior Member

    Alicante, Spain
    England - English (British English)
    So it's written confirmation of lack of conflict of interest?
     
  7. Dani California

    Dani California Senior Member

    Spain, Spanish
    Hola, Janet:
    En este caso el perito no solo afirma la ausencia de conflicto de intereses por su parte (o incompatibilidad) sino además que no incurre o no está incurso en ninguno de los supuestos legales de recusación o tacha.
    El problema está en asignar en inglés el término correspondiente a la recusación y a la tacha (que responden a causas distintas y son figuras distintas), para el primero se sugirió recusal, en tanto para la segunda (tacha) podría ser challenge... aunque si buscas en los glosarios y diccionarios legales (p.e. Alcaráz Varó y Hughes) la palabra recusación encuentras: recusation/challenge/objection y si buscas tacha pues encuentras....lo mismo...y además disqualification.
    En fin, cuestión de elección para quien promovió el hilo. Un saludo.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  8. JanetF Senior Member

    Alicante, Spain
    England - English (British English)
    Hi, Dani! Thank you for all that. My immediate reaction is Ouf! I'm glad I don't have to find a suitable English equivalent, although if I did have to, I think I would base it on David's suggestion.

    Un saludo como siempre.
     
  9. David Senior Member

    I added a couple of words to my suggestion based on Dani´s comment, but think it remains sound. Supuestos are really grounds, but I can´t find a verb that goes with grounds in the same way that the participial adjective incurso fits with supuestos, hence my substittion of engaged in any x that would require.
     
  10. ampurdan

    ampurdan Modstachioed modnster

    jiā tàiluó ní yà
    Català & español (Spain)
    Indeed, there's a problem here with the word "supuesto", as in "supuesto de hecho de una norma jurídica". I haven't found an English word or phrase that translates perfectly "supuesto (de hecho)". It refers to the facts that trigger the legal consequences planned in a norm. There are some expressions, but they all apply to concepts of criminal law, which is not the case.

    The expert is not declaring that there is a lack of a conflict of interests, not exactly. The expert is stating that he is not involved in any of the situations that according to positive law (one or more sections of one or more acts) would enable his recusal, disqualification or challenge for cause. The former might be quite more precise than the latter (depending on the terms of the Act, "ley") and is likely to be interpreted more strictly. Therefore, I would not use “or would taint his opinions”.

    I would not use “engaged in any of the practices or activities” either, but rather “involved in any of the situations which would enable his recusal, disqualification or challenge for cause according to section x” or something more idiomatic but with similar sense.
     
  11. elcarnicero88 Senior Member

    Yo traduzco "incurso" como:

    involved in
    implicated in
    engaged in
     
  12. litiga8or

    litiga8or Senior Member

    Oregon, USA
    Rainy Oregon! USA
    Janet is correct.

    The expert below-signed ....
    has no conflict of interest ...
    is disinterested ...
    is not an interested party in these proceedings ...
     
  13. elcarnicero88 Senior Member

    "Below-signed" sounds a bit awkward.

    "The undersigned expert" sounds better in my opinion...
     
  14. Jim986

    Jim986 Senior Member

    New Zealand English
    Yo tengo que traducir esto:

    No encontrarse incurso en alguna de las causales de inhabilidad o incompatibilidad para celebrar contratos con entidades estatales, de acuerdo con lo establecido en los artículos 8°, 9º, 10º de la Ley XXX/xxx.

    Pongo: Bidders shall not have incurred in situations which would entail recusal or disqualification of eligibility to enter into contracts with public authorities (government bodies?) under the provisions of articles 8, 9 and 10 of Act XXX/xxx.

    ¿Alguna sugerencia?
     
  15. pachanga7 Senior Member

    Southeast U.S.
    U.S. English
    For the OP, you might say "none of the grounds for recusal apply to him" or "none of the statutory grounds established in the foregoing article requiring disqualification as an expert witness apply to him."

    I am not very sure of any real differences among "recusación, incompatibilidad, o tacha"--perhaps this is only an example of legal verbosity in the original?

    For the second instance, of "No encontrarse incurso":

    Bidders shall not be ineligible to enter into contracts with the state by reason of any of the grounds for disqualification laid out in Articles....
    Bidders shall not be subject to disqualification as parties legally permitted to enter into contracts with the state....
    Bidders must meet all legal requirements for entering into contracts with the state, according to the provisions of....
    Bidders must be legally eligible to contract for services with the state, as provided for in Articles....
     
  16. Jim986

    Jim986 Senior Member

    New Zealand English
    Thanks, Pachanga7.

    Yes, that's good, and in line with the tendency to simplify legal language. I can't remember what I put two years ago, but my "try" above is certainly too literal. Nowadays I don't translate boilerplate legalese into boilerplate legalese but try to make it understandable to the layman.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015

Share This Page