Glossary entry (derived from question below)
French term or phrase:
sous effet
English translation:
sans effet
French term
United Kingdom
sous effet
"Les dispositions du règlement (UE) no. 1215/2012 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 12 décembre 2012 viennent se substituer aux règles de compétence territoriales, telles que consacrées par les dispositions du droit commun luxembourgeois qui sont sous effet dans l'ordre international;"
I have only ever come across "sous effet de" as in "under the influence of something" but never as an adjective, which is how it is being used here. I believe it means that Luxembourg law is lower down the pecking order in international terms but I've been unable to find any references online.
| 4 +3 | sans effet |
philgoddard
|
Non-PRO (1): Ben Gaia
When entering new questions, KudoZ askers are given an opportunity* to classify the difficulty of their questions as 'easy' or 'pro'. If you feel a question marked 'easy' should actually be marked 'pro', and if you have earned more than 20 KudoZ points, you can click the "Vote PRO" button to recommend that change.
How to tell the difference between "easy" and "pro" questions:
An easy question is one that any bilingual person would be able to answer correctly. (Or in the case of monolingual questions, an easy question is one that any native speaker of the language would be able to answer correctly.)
A pro question is anything else... in other words, any question that requires knowledge or skills that are specialized (even slightly).
Another way to think of the difficulty levels is this: an easy question is one that deals with everyday conversation. A pro question is anything else.
When deciding between easy and pro, err on the side of pro. Most questions will be pro.
* Note: non-member askers are not given the option of entering 'pro' questions; the only way for their questions to be classified as 'pro' is for a ProZ.com member or members to re-classify it.
Proposed translations
United States
Six languages into flawless English
Native in: English
Works in: German to English, French to English, Spanish to English, and 4 more.
sans effet
| neutral |
B D Finch
: "Sans effet" doesn't mean "not relevant". "Not relevant" and "not valid" aren't synonyms. As AllegroTrans comments below, the correct meaning is "without effect".
2 hrs
|
|
Yes it does. Luxembourg common law is not valid in other countries.
|
|
| agree |
AllegroTrans
: Highly probable, but "not relevant" is not the meaning, it means "without effect"; Luxembourg doesn't have common law, it has civil law based on the Code Napoléon
4 hrs
|
|
|
|
| agree |
writeaway
: agree with AT. Probably typo for sans but your suggested translation is incorrect.
6 hrs
|
| agree |
Gareth Callagy
: It seems "sans effect" is what was meant. A legal reference I found online is "pas sans effet dans l'ordre juridique international"
7 hrs
|
| disagree |
Daryo
: I can't see there anything mistyped - only a misinterpreted meaning of one term, that would turn the whole sentence into a real-life nonsense. // Good luck to you to go boating on a dried lake ... I wouldn't try. Reductio ad absurdum?
21 hrs
|
|
I*m pretty sure you're the only person here who thinks it's "sous".
|
|
| agree |
Germaine
: L’ordre international propose des règles différentes de celles du droit commun luxembourgeois. C’est, de toute évidence, une coquille pour "sans".
3 days 7 hrs
|
Discussion
"to supersede" is certainly present in this ST, but it corresponds to "viennent se substituer aux règles ...", not to the "... sous effet ..." part.
Also, you could try another method that usually works quite well, due to the redundancy that is in-built in the language used by humans: just take the offending/puzzling term out, and try to find what could fill the gap in a way that the whole sentence/paragraph makes sense. If there is only one possibility, and you can reasonably assume that the writer is not prone to talking nonsense, then it ought to be the intended meaning, whatever clumsy/unusual/local term was used.
as for the idea that IN THIS ST "sous effet" could possibly mean that
"the provisions of the Luxembourg laws that are being substituted/superseded/replaced by this EU Regulation" are "NOT producing any effect/not being valid" at the time of the substitution ...
just explain how you would repaint a demolished wall? I agree that "repainting a demolished wall" is grammatically a perfectly correct sentence, but RealWord v1.0 could have some objections to the idea.
Or closer to the ST: rules/legal dispositions that are not in force / do no produce any effect are simply gathering dust, NO ONE EVER is going to bother to do any kind of "substitution" to these dead rules.
So, even in a century of Sundays "sous effet" can not be a typo for "sans effet".
Having said that, you probably need to do a lot of reading on this EU Regulation and on the Luxembourg law concerned to get the right nuance of "effet" that is being produced.
Point of method: Reductio ad absurdum / la démonstration par l'absurde may not be the most elegant method, but it never fails. If assumption "A" leads to absurd, then assumption "A" MUST be false.
Another way at looking at the wider picture:
Episode one: before this EU directive
there are in the "droit commun luxembourgeois" some rules regarding conflict of laws, that are at that time applicable / in force
Episode two: comes this "règlement (UE) no. 1215/2012 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 12 décembre 2012" which is about "la compétence judiciaire, la reconnaissance et l’exécution des décisions en matière civile et commerciale"
the part about "la compétence judiciaire" is in effect about solving conflicts of laws, deciding which law will be applicable.
As the EU law takes precedence over national laws, once in force, the part of this EU regulation that is about "la compétence judiciaire" / "règles de compétence territoriales" will replace (Les dispositions ... viennent se substituer) "dispositions du droit commun luxembourgeois qui sont sous effet dans l'ordre international" i.e. the rules from the Luxembourg laws on the same matter (conflicts of laws) that are the time of this substitution in force / qui produisent un effet ...
That would be the logical equivalent of "repainting a demolished wall"!!!
no one would ever bother replacing legal dispositions which are NOT currently applicable at the time of "replacement" not even the most time-wasting empty debating club type of parliament.
Replacement laws/legal dispositions are ALWAYS a replacement for laws/legal dispositions in force / applicable at the time of the substitution.
"Les dispositions du règlement (UE) no. 1215/2012 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 12 décembre 2012 viennent se substituer aux règles de compétence territoriales, telles que consacrées par les dispositions du droit commun luxembourgeois qui sont sous effet dans l'ordre international;
=
les dispositions du droit commun luxembourgeois qui produisent un effet dans l'ordre international
IOW those rules in the Luxembourg's "droit commun" about conflicts of laws that do apply ... will be replaced by the rules from "le règlement (UE) no. 1215/2012".
No point arguing about what "qui sont sous effet" could/would/should mean in French French, Luxembourg French can be as tricky/weird as Swiss French + it has to make real-life sense.