Лектори докладно проаналізували разом з учасниками архаїчну та сучасну юридичну англійську мову, а саме:

1. Terms of Art: правнича термінологія в англійській мові.

2. Foreign Terminology: французькі та латинські терміни в юридичній англійській мові.

3. Doublets and Triplets: поєднання двох-трьох слів, що передає одне лексичне значення.

4. Here-, there- and where- words: приклади застосування архаїчних термінів в юридичний англійській мові.

5. Практичні завдання за темою заходу.

У рамках характеристики архаїчної та сучасної юридичної англійської мови акцентовано на наступному:

1. Terms of Art in Legal English

In Legal English, terms of art refer to words or expressions that possess a specific, technical legal meaning, which is different from their ordinary or everyday usage. These terms are traditionally used because lawyers believe that their established interpretation through case law and legal practice ensures certainty, predictability, and precision.

That terms of art are not merely “difficult words,” but linguistic units that function as legal tools. For example, the word consideration in everyday English means “thought” or “reflection,” whereas in contract law it means something of value given in exchange for a promise, such as payment or a contractual obligation.

·              Genuine terms of art (e.g. waiver, restrictive covenant, restraint of trade), which are difficult to replace without legal risk;

·              Pure legalese, where complex wording is used unnecessarily, such as notwithstanding or hereinafter in contexts where plain English would suffice.

Through the lawyer–client dialogue example, the presentation illustrates how terms of art create a communicative barrier between lawyers and clients, reinforcing the idea that modern legal drafting should critically assess whether a term of art is truly indispensable.

2. Foreign Terminology: French and Latin Terms in Legal English

Legal English has been profoundly influenced by French and Latin, primarily as a result of the Norman Conquest and the subsequent dominance of these languages in law and administration. As a result, many foreign terms remain embedded in modern legal discourse.

French terminologyН

That French terms are still actively used in contracts and legal proceedings, particularly where they express concepts concisely and precisely. Examples include:

·              vis-à-vis – meaning “in relation to” or “with regard to”;

·              voir dire – the judicial procedure of questioning prospective jurors to assess their suitability;

·              liaison – referring to coordination or communication between parties;

·              in lieu of – meaning “instead of” or “in place of”.

These expressions are generally not translated because they are well-established and understood within legal practice.

Latin terminology:

Latin terms perform a crucial function by encapsulating complex legal doctrines in short, formulaic expressions. The presentation highlights:

·              actus reus – the physical element of a crime;

·              mens rea – the mental or intentional element;

·              ex parte – proceedings conducted without notice to the other party;

·              habeas corpus – the fundamental right to challenge unlawful detention;

·              ultra vires – actions taken beyond legal authority.

Latin terms: transcription, calquing, transfer with explanation, or leaving them untranslated due to their internationally recognized meaning.

3. Doublets and Triplets in Legal English

Doublets and triplets are combinations of two or three words that together convey what is usually a single legal concept. The presentation explains that this linguistic phenomenon developed historically due to the coexistence of English, French, and Latin legal vocabulary.

Doublets include expressions such as:

·              null and void,

·              fit and proper,

·              terms and conditions.

Triplets include:

·              dispute, controversy or claim,

·              promise, agree and covenant,

·              give, devise and bequeath.

Modern drafting practice tends to avoid unnecessary repetition and prefers single-word equivalents. However, it also warns that in certain contexts each word may have a distinct legal meaning. For example:

·              term refers to a contractual obligation or duration;

·              covenant is a binding promise, often related to real property;

·              condition is an essential contractual term, breach of which may lead to termination.

The example devise and bequeath illustrates that although the phrase may be translated as “to bequeath,” legally devise applies to real property, while bequeath applies to personal property.

4. Here-, There- and Where- Words in Legal English

Here-, there- and where- words belong to what the presentation defines as arcane or archaic vocabulary. These words are rarely used in ordinary English but persist in legal drafting due to tradition.

Examples include:

·              hereby – “by means of this document”;

·              herein – “in this document”;

·              hereto – “to this contract”;

·              thereon – “on the thing just mentioned”;

·              whereby – “by which”;

·              whereof – “of which”.

That here- words usually refer to the document itself, there- words require the reader to look back to identify the reference, and where- words describe relationships or consequences.

Modern drafting guidance strongly recommends replacing such words with clear references or defined terms, as they increase cognitive load and risk misinterpretation, particularly in cross-border contracts.

5. Practical Tasks Related to the Topic

That mastering Legal English requires not only theoretical knowledge but also practical application. Practical tasks focus on:

·              identifying archaic, foreign, or redundant language in authentic legal texts;

·              replacing legalese with plain English equivalents;

·              analysing contracts to determine whether terms of art are legally necessary;

·              rewriting clauses to improve clarity, conciseness, and accessibility.

Exercises include transforming clauses such as: “Save as expressly set out herein, the Licensor shall not be responsible…” into clear modern English while preserving legal meaning.

The overall aim is to balance legal precision with comprehensibility, ensuring that legal documents are understood the first time they are read.