This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
Distribuição da Ação
requereu a denunciação à lide
May 28, 2011 13:54
13 yrs ago
22 viewers *
Portuguese term

a contestante aduz

Portuguese to English Law/Patents Insurance legal terminology
This phrase (legalise?) keeps occuring in a legal report refuting claims by the plaintiff that the traffic accident was caused by faulty parts of the car.
I understand what they are saying but have some doubts as to the best way to present this in a technical manner so to speak?
I quote the actual context belwow:

Por outro lado, a contestante aduz não poder ser responsabilizada também pelo fato de o veículo não mais comportar sua originalidade na ocasião do acidente.
Proposed translations (English)
4 the plaintiff alleges
4 +1 the defendant alleges
5 the plaintiff presents (adds?)

Discussion

Gilmar Fernandes May 29, 2011:
Mark, you have a valid point... when you say contestante is "quem contesta" but as I said earlier this confusing term can only be clarified by reading the full context and checking who filed the claim/lawsuit. It's not like "autor e réu" or "requerente e requerido/a" where it's straightforward Plaintiff and Defendant. We both have a 50/50 chance of being right/wrong :)
Mark Robertson May 29, 2011:
Cont. But that does not necessarily mean that the contestante is a Defendant. If a counterclaim/reconvenção is made in the proceedings the Claimant/Plaintiff will be the contestante.
Mark Robertson May 29, 2011:
Gilmar; Surely the contestante must be "quem contesta", while the contestado is the party against whom a contestação is filed.
coolbrowne May 29, 2011:
Plaintiff no doubt, but what would said phrase be? From the submitted fragment, it does seem clear that the correct term for "contestante" in this context would be plaintiff (not defendant), even if she is seeking to refute an allegation by another party (which might itself be a plaintiff in another setting).

However, if I may be indulged at all, I confess to being somewhat curious: does the phrase "a contestante aduz" appear several times? It's not impossible, but it seems unlikely. If not, it would be good to know exactly what phrase is being referred to. Maybe someone could shed some light on that as well.

Thank you
Gilmar Fernandes May 29, 2011:
Contestante e Contestado I suppose there are different interpretations of these two terms. If you google them and take the time to read you will see it can certainly get confusing. The only one that can really ascertain this would be Andrew(with the full source text) by checking which party in fact initiated the lawsuit and that obviously would be the PLAINTIFF.

Proposed translations

1 hr
Selected

the plaintiff alleges

Yes, CONTESTANTE is just another term for "autor" in a lawsuit which is PLAINTIFF as you correctly translated. See:

PARTES – FORMA DE IDENTIFICAÇÃO

Qual seria o mais correto para identificar as partes na contestação?
Contestante e Contestado
Autor e Réu
Contestante e Autor
ou o nome das partes ex: Félix e Ana

Nereida,

Não há mais correto.

Procure alternar entre os termos para não ficar repetitiva. Não sugiro que se refira às partes pelo nome. Pode se usar também demandante e demandado, peticionante, requerente e requerido (estes, especialmente, se for procedimento de jurisdição voluntária).
Quando houver mais de uma pessoa ocupando o mesmo polo na relação jurídica processual e você quiser se referir à apenas um deles use: Primeiro autor, segundo autor, primeiro réu, segundo réu, conforme a ordem que apareçam no corpo da petição.

Re: aduzir = literally ADDUCE ....obviously not used nowadays

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegation

An allegation (also called adduction) is a claim of a fact by a party in a pleading, which the party claims to be able to prove. Allegations remain assertions without proof, until they can be proved.[1]
Peer comment(s):
neutral Mark Robertson : 1. In English adduce means to present or offer, e.g. to adduce evidence, it does not mean to allege or plead. 2. Sin? Did I translate aduz as adduce?
1 day 18 hrs
OK, so you're saying you also committed the same sin in your suggestion :))
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "I thank the in put from everyone on this, and I believe we all on the same track more or less so I give the endorsement to Gilmar purely because he was first to give his answer."
+1
8 hrs

the defendant alleges

Contestante means defendant, cf. Chaves de Mello, Dicionário Jurídico, and Deocleciano Torrieri Guimarães Dicionário Técnico Jurídico. You could use claims instead of alleges.
Peer comment(s):
agree Donna Sandin : also confirmed in Marcilio Moreira de Castro as defendant, or "answering defendant'
1 day 3 hrs
Something went wrong...
9 hrs

the plaintiff presents (adds?)

In fact "aduzir" is "to adduce", which is NOT "to allege" but rather, to bring up or present proof/reasons/witnesses. From Dicionário Aurélio:

"Trazer, apresentar (razões, provas, testemunhas)" [end quote]

However - and here it gets tricky - I suspect the writer is using it wrongly (didn't check the dictionary), because "aduzir" requires both a direct object (what is being presented) and an indirect one (to whom is that being presented). While "não poder ser responsabilizada..." could perhaps be accepted as the direct object, the indirect one is missing. That leads me to believe that the writer is trying to replace the verb "adicionar" with the fancier verb "aduzir", not knowing it's not the same thing (should have looked it up). Wouldn't be the first time a lawyer - or some other person writing in "legalese" - went overboard and screwed up by trying to sound important. My money is on "the plaintiff adds".
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search