class of such persons

18:27 Feb 5, 2019 

I think in this instance you are interpreting this wrongly: the 'classes' of people involved are not 'moral' or 'physique', but potential subsets of either (or both) of those.
Everything hinges on that little word 'such', and its position in the word order; for it to mean what you appear to be suggesting, the word order would need to be '...such classes of persons...' — but here it is '...classes of such persons...'
I.e. these 'classes' might be subsets of all 'individuals or legal entities'; for example 'individuals with blue eyes' or 'legal entities with fewer then 10 employees'.
'Class' here needs to be read, as Daryo so rightly points out, as an unspecified 'subset' of these people, unlike a specifically defined 'group' of them.

18:14 Feb 5, 2019 

I’m not leaving out the concept: the word "class" is certainly not necessary to differentiate a natural person from an artificial person and that’s what this clause is about. If you read my previous comment, you will realize that "toute personne morale ou entité juridique" includes any artificial person whatsoever (the "class"), which means a lot of "persons" sharing the defining characteristic of being "artificial persons". En fait, la phrase pourrait se lire simplement "...toute personne physique ou entité juridque..." qu’on n’y perdrait aucunement la "personne morale" (qui est une "entité juridique").

Note que "or class of such persons" ne renvoie qu’à "legal entity" - en tout cas, dans la mesure où il est permis de présumer que le "Foundation Council" n’est pas un organisme raciste ou du même type qui exclurait de ses bénéficiaires certaines "catégories" de personnes physiques (riches? pauvres? handicapées? blanches? vertes?...).

17:30 Feb 5, 2019 

you are leaving out the concept of "class", as used in this ST i.e. not just ANY group, but a group that shares some defining characteristics.

IOW they are leaving the possibility to define new "members of the Class of Beneficiaries" not by enumerating them (giving a list of names) but by defining a "class of beneficiaries" i.e giving a definition [a list of criteria] of who can be part a "class" of potential beneficiaries.

19:47 Feb 3, 2019 

En fait, on vise la notion de "personne" en droit: any individual [personne physique] or legal entity or class of such persons [ou entité juridique ou catégorie de telles personnes juridiques]. Ces autres "catégories de personnes juridiques" (ou "personnes fictives") sont des entités personnalisées ou des corps constitués qui détiennent une "personnalité juridique", par ex.: personne morale de droit public, personne morale de droit privé, société par actions, société en nom collectif, société en commandite, fiducie, municipalité, ville, etc. D’où:

... a le droit de désigner comme membres de la Catégorie de bénéficiaires, dans des règlements particuliers... toute personne physique, toute personne morale ou [telle] entité juridique ou toute institution ou organisation religieuse, caritative ou éducative....

17:39 Feb 3, 2019 

The important thing to note, which both Daryo and FX seem to have interpreted correctly, is that this 'class' of people is in a general sense: people with blue eyes, etc.
This is quite different from some specifically-established group of people, as mentioned, for example, in Cecile's refs.
It's like 'people who use buses' compared to 'a group of people going on a bus excursion'.

15:02 Feb 3, 2019 

Thank you for helping, I think FX Fraipont is right and Daryo explained it why very well!

14:01 Feb 3, 2019 

what I mean by "circular reasoning"

If you try to define what can belong to a set (here of what can be included in "the Class of Beneficiaries") saying that X will belong to the set if it satisfies the criteria of "belonging to the set" doesn't define anything.

IOW anyone that ends up included in "the Class of Beneficiaries" will become "directement concernées" [direct object of the activities of this Foundation Council] after being included, so it can be used as a defining criteria of what can be included or not.

11:36 Feb 3, 2019 

as in the few words JUST BEFORE? The whole of:

"any individual or legal entity or class of such persons"

is one element of this list of potential members of "the Class of Beneficiaries".

expanded for easier interpretation "any individual or legal entity or class of such persons"

MEANS given that "such" refers to "any individual or legal entity":

"any individual or any legal entity or any class made of individuals or any class made of legal entities"

All I can see is a mention of either "natural person(s)" or "legal person(s)", either just one or a "class/group/category" of them.

Doesn't look to me that they indulged in inventing some new categories of subjects of law that could be defined as "personnes similaires à des personnes physiques ou morales".

10:50 Feb 3, 2019 

type de personnes similaires

10:45 Feb 3, 2019 

the (general) English language, it's about the laws governing charitable / non-profit organisations in UK - you can't create a charity for a named beneficiary, you can only create a charity for a "class/category" of beneficiaries, specifically defined in the founding acts of the charity, and the charitable organisation must be open to anyone from that "class/category" of potential beneficiaries. (you can't create a charity ONLY for your blind cousin, it must a charity helping ANY blind people, i.e. available to any potential beneficiary belonging to the class of "blind people")

In short "assimilé" won't work. "class of such persons" / "Class of Beneficiaries" is about precisely defined groups of natural/legal persons.

BTW if you read the whole clause, it's about defining the "Class of Beneficiaries" for this organisation - they made a definition that allows them to add ANY "class" (precisely defined category) of either individuals or legal entities.

06:39 Feb 3, 2019 

I'm not able to give you an answer as such, but my instinctive feeling is that the problem with your proposal really lies in the use of 'similaires'.
I would tend to expect to find something like 'telles', for example. Or even something like 'y afférentes'...