contractual choice of law and forum clauses

15:47 Jan 11, 2019 

My bad: I forgot the "square" in front of "brackets"! Sorry for the confusion! I made the correction.

As for the quotation marks, I considered the missing one as another typo in the text, but I also found a version of the source where the quotation mark is not missing and where the related footnote mentions two page numbers.

15:19 Jan 11, 2019 

I've read your comment below (01:53 ) a couple of times and still can't make head nor tail of it. In EN-uk, brackets are used to elaborate a pronoun if that is done by the author, while square brackets are used for that purpose if the elaboration is by somebody else. I've since discovered that, apparently, in EN-us square brackets can be used for both, which has the disadvantage of losing authorship information.
https://www.gsbe.co.uk/grammar-brackets.html
https://www.scribendi.com/advice/square_brackets_curly_brack...

However, to clarify my comment re the question, the following text has two opening quotation marks, but only one closing quotation mark. So, something is wrong there:
“Europe is unwilling to enforce “[contractual choice of law and forum clauses] unless they favor the consumer”

The point I raised about the square brackets is that, if this is either a template or a draft that needs to be completed, e.g. by a secretary, the square brackets would indicate that the person completing the document should insert the appropriate details (of the contractual choice of law and forum clauses), to replace the square brackets & what is included within them

00:53 Jan 11, 2019 

You forget that square brackets are also used to replace a pronoun or a demonstrative by the text they refer to, which (usually) appear right before. Since such square brackets indicate that you won’t find the quote "as is", removing them would betray the source, and removing or replacing (by what?) the whole (if this is what you mean), would be even worse (I hope you would first have a word with the client).

In this case, it seems that the quote is made of segments of two sentences. Since the report doesn’t exist in French, the translation isn’t a "quote" and I don’t need the quotation marks. I chose one presentation in my answer. Another way (which could be prefered for this kind of paper) would be:

« Il y a méprise lorsque le projet de rapport de l’ABA signale que l’Europe « is unwilling to enforce » les clauses contractuelles de choix de loi et d’élection de for « unless they favor the consumer. »

12:40 Jan 10, 2019 

Are the square brackets in the source text? Square brackets generally mean either that the text within them has been added by someone (e.g. a translator) as extra information to help the reader, or that the text within them constitutes a link to another document with text that should be inserted to replace both the square brackets and the text within them (like a mail merge). So, square brackets indicate that what they contain is not integral to the rest of the text and can/should be removed or replaced.

21:23 Jan 9, 2019 

it's about the fact/the general principle that the contracting parties have the choice when making their contract to agree about applicable laws and which tribunals will be competent in case of litigation - as opposed to not having that choice.

17:59 Jan 9, 2019 

Le parsing n’est pas
contractual choice of / law and forum clauses
(ce qui donnerait d’ailleurs "choix contractuel de clauses de droit et de for" - ou le choix du droit et du for disparaît), mais bien
contractual / choice of law and forum clauses : littéralement, "clauses de choix du droit/des lois applicable/s et d’élection de for contractuelles.

Il s’agit de clauses qui définissent/établissent le choix effectué par les parties. Par exemple:
"Ce contrat est régi par le droit français"
est une clause (contractuelle) de choix du droit applicable.

Si on avait "contractual choice of law and forum", je serais d’accord qu’on parle d’un choix contractuel (le choix énoncé dans les clauses pertinentes du contrat oblige). Mais dans la mesure où on ajoute "clauses", on parle d’un type spécifique de clause dans un contrat.

Vous remarquerez d’ailleurs qu’on trouve souvent les graphies "(contractual) choice-of-law clause" "choice-of-forum clause" (et "choice-of-court clause).

P.S. "not to enforce" n’est pas "forbid to draft". J’ai l’impression qu’on n’a pas lu la même question, ni le même article 7 du projet de Convention ou alors, la même version.

17:36 Jan 9, 2019 

Je suis d'accord avec Germaine que choice of law and forum clauses est une expression quasi-figée, qui se traduit généralement par « clauses relatives au choix de droit applicable et de juridiction » (par ex.). Mais le contexte ici est le refus de l'UE d'accorder cette liberté de rédiger un contrat d'une manière qui ne serait pas favorable aux consommateurs. Il s'agit de la liberté de choisir le type de contrat et c'est dans ce sens que je comprends contractual : choix en matière de/applicable aux contrats, d'où « choix contractuel ». On ne parle pas ici de choice of law and forum contractual clauses. L'effet de confusion vient de la proximité de ce terme avec les mots choice et clause - auquel il est effectivement le plus souvent associé mais qui aurait entraîné une répétition inutile (existe-t-il des clauses qui ne sont pas contractuelles ?)

14:55 Jan 9, 2019 

Two Wikipedia links to make clear what these contractual clauses are about:

1. Choice of law clause: "a term of a contract in which the parties specify that any dispute arising under the contract shall be determined in accordance with the law of a particular jurisdiction." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice_of_law_clause

2. Forum selection clause: a contract term that "allows the parties to agree that any disputes relating to that contract will be resolved in a specific forum. They usually operate in conjunction with a choice of law clause which determines the proper law of the relevant contract." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_selection_clause

Such clauses are typically enforced in the US (with some exceptions, e.g. clauses that specify the law of a state that has no connection to the contract or the contracting parties). Apparently the situation is different in Europe.