Лектори докладно проаналізували разом з учасниками юридичну англійську, а саме:

1. English That Fails: Legal Drafting Errors and Their Reputational Costs.

2. Mistake-Proof Legal Writing: Grammar and Punctuation You Can’t Afford to Get Wrong.

3. How effectively avoid Issues with miscellaneous clauses in contracts: focusing on proactive drafting.

4. Legal Englis mistakes in corporate relations.

У рамках характеристики юридичної англійської акцентовано на наступному:

1. English That Fails: Legal Drafting Errors and Their Reputational Costs

In the legal profession, even a single ambiguous or poorly chosen word in English can turn a binding agreement into a source of costly litigation or public scrutiny. Real-world cases have shown that drafting errors not only weaken contractual enforceability but can also severely damage a firm's professional reputation.

Specific Legislative Acts:

• United States – Plain Writing Act of 2010. A federal law requiring all U.S. government agencies to use “clear Government communication that the public can understand and use.”

• New Zealand Legislation Design and Advisory Committee (LDAC). LDAC provides official guidance on legislative clarity, including how laws should be structured and drafted for best interpretability.

Social Initiatives for the clear language in law:

• United Kingdom. The Office of Parliamentary Counsel (OPC) Simplification Initiative. Though the UK does not have a formal "Plain Language Law", the OPC launched a major campaign to reduce legalese in legislation.

• Canada. Federal and Provincial Plain. Language Movements. Not a single federal act, but both the federal and provincial governments have adopted plain language drafting principles.

• Sweden. The “Plain Swedish”. Movement. A long-standing government-supported movement called "Klar Språk" (Clear Language).

1. McDonald vs. Kroc (1961):

In1961, Ray Kroc purchased the rights to the McDonald’s name and system from the original founders, Richard and Maurice McDonald,for$2.7million.

According to various interviews and biographies (including Ray Kroc’s own memoir), the McDonald brothers believed they had a verbal agreement to continue receiving 1% of gross sales in royalties — but this clause was never put in writing in the final contract.

Because the royalty was not legally documented, the brothers never received it.

The case of McDonald vs. Kroc (1961) —while not a formal court case in the traditional sense — is a powerful real-world example of how poor legal drafting, misunderstanding of terms, and over-trusting informal agreements.

2. Rogers Communications vs. Bell Aliant (2006):

What Happened: A misplaced comma in a contract allowed Bell Aliant to terminate an agreement early, contrary to Rogers Communications'intentions.

Impact: The misinterpretation due to the comma placement led to a $2.3 million loss for Rogers.

Lesson: Proper punctuation in legal documents is crucial, as misplacement can alter the meaning of contractual terms significantly.

3. Wei GuangReal Estates v. NettwerkProductions (2021):

What Happened: In a property sale agreement, a clause intended to state that the land did not contain hazardous substances (небезпечні речовини) was mistakenly written without the word “not,” implying the opposite.

Impact: The buyer discovered contamination and sought remediation costs, leading to legal disputes over the contract's interpretation.

Lesson: Omitting a single word in a contract can reverse its meaning, emphasizing the need for meticulous drafting and review.

2. Mistake-Proof Legal Writing: Grammar and Punctuation You Can’t Afford to Get Wrong

A single misplaced comma can alter the outcome of a case or invalidate a clause. Legal writing is not just about language it's about legal meaning. Mistake-proof legal writing is not a luxury – it is a professional obligation.

Grammar Mistakes:

Prepositions:

BY: 'by' is a time expression in contracts and is used when stating a deadline. For example, 'the buyer must pay for the goods by 29 April’.

A problem of interpretation is the question of what'by' precisely means. ls 28 April the last possible date for payment? Or can I pay on 29 April? “The Licensee agrees to make full payment to the Licensor of all sums due under this Agreement by 1 September 2024”.

Modern drafting advice is to avoid any ambiguity by using the phrase 'on or before' instead of 'by'. 'The buyer must pay for the goods on or before 29 April'.

There are no clear rules to follow in this respect, but some examples of common usages are set out below:

• It is agreed that the goods will be collected from the Seller’s warehouse at 21 Redwoods Road.

• It is agreed that the goods will be collected from the Seller’s warehouse in/on Redwoods Road.

• Interest will be charged on any unpaid instalments after the expiration of a period of 28 days from the date hereof.

• He was charged with murder.

Sexist language:

A good work around is to use the plural possessive form, their.

The Oxford English Dictionary sanctions the use of this form to refer to ‘belonging or associated with a person whose sex is not specified’. In this way, the writer can avoid using sexist language.

For example: Every competent lawyer must ensure that their legal knowledge is kept up to date.

Gender-Neutral Pronouns: The singular "they" is becoming more widely accepted in legal contexts to refer to an individual whose gender is unknown or irrelevant. For example, "The plaintiff has the right to present their case."

Worst Mistakes with Modal Verbs in Legal English:

Mistake:Using shallfor both obligations and future actions. The contract shall terminate on 1 January 2026. This use blurs whether it's a commandor a simple future event.

Better: The contract terminateson 1 January 2026 (Simple fact). The tenant mustvacate the premises by 1 January 2026 (Obligation).

The US Courts are eliminating “shall” in favor of “must” in their Rules of Procedure. One example of these rules is cited below.

Instead of using “shall”, use:

• “must” for an obligation,

• “must not” for a prohibition,

• “may” for a discretionary action, and

• “should” for a recommendation.

Be to у юридичних текстах висловлює необхідність вчинення дії згідно з попередньою домовленістю або прийнятим рішенням. За своїми значеннями та вживанням в офіційних документах воно практично аналогічне до модального дієслова shall.

1) Повинен, зобов'язаний The Sellers are to obtain an Export License at their expense. (Продавці зобов'язані отримати експортну ліцензію за свій рахунок.)

2) Дієслово-присудок у майбутньому часі Within 3 working days of receipt of the delivery program from Seller, Buyer is to confirm his readiness to receive the goods according to such program. (Протягом 3 (трьох) робочих днів після отримання програми постачання від Продавця Покупець підтвердить готовність приймати товар відповідно до цієї програми).

3) Дієслово-присудок в теперішньому часі The sum of penalty is to be deducted by the Buyer from the Seller’s invoices when paying it. (Штраф утримується Покупцем під час оплати рахунків Продавця).

Example: Non-or un-?

The prefixes non- and un- both mean ‘not’ but they tend to be used in slightly different ways. Non- is more neutral in meaning, while un- means an opposite and thus often suggests a particular bias or standpoint.

For example, unnatural means that something is not natural in a bad way, whereas non-natural simply means ‘not natural’.

As a consequence, where there is a genuine choice about which prefix to use, non-is preferred in legal writing (e.g. non-statutory instead of unstatutory).

Punctuation Mistakes:

Unpunctuated sentences:

• This man said the judge is a fool.

• Woman without her man would be a savage.

Now consider the same sentences with punctuation:

• This man, said the judge, is a fool.

• Woman without her, man would be a savage.

Commas should be used where necessary to clarify meaning.

Simply omitting the commas often leads to ambiguity or an unintended meaning.

Oxford comma:

«Oксфордська кома» (Oxford comma), відома як «гарвардська» та «серійна» кома (Harvard comma, Serial comma або Series comma) ставиться перед сполучниками and, or чи nor, наприкінці речення перед останнім словом у списку перелічуваних однорідних членів речення.

Oxford comma необхідно вживати в юридичних текстах з метою уникнення двозначності та дотримання чіткості та ясного розуміння самого юридичного тексту. Наприклад, The plaintiff must establish duty, breach, causation, and damages.

Без Oxford comma- The company’s website includes instructional manuals, links to other sites and items for sale. (Are the items for sale available on the company’s website or linked on the “other sites”?).

З Oxford comma- The company’s website includes instructional manuals, links to other sites, and items for sale. (The items for sale are on the company’s website).

Colon (:):

The colon information is that usually follows it used . It may to point also be to used to link two clauses.

Here are some examples of usage:

• To precede a list (e.g. ‘The following items are included:’).

• To introduce a step from an introduction to a main theme or from a general statement to a particular situation (e.g. ‘The remedy is simple: introduce new rules.’).

• To show cause and effect (e.g. ‘An energetic new director has been appointed: this accounts for the rise in share prices.’).

• To precede an explanation (e.g. ‘The argument used by the defense was as follows:’).

Colons should not be followed by a dash (-). The dash serves no useful purpose in this context.

Apostrophe (’):

There are two uses for the apostrophe:

1. First, it is used to show that a word has been shortened or that two words have been combined. For example: I’ll be there, so don’t say that I won’t. This use of the apostrophe to shorten a word is not usually seen in legal writing as it is considered too informal for most situations.

2. Secondly, the apostrophe is used to show that something belongs to somebody or somethingelse. Forexample:Theclient’s payment was late.

Take care when using its:

• It only takes an apostrophe when it is short for it is or it has. For example: It’s a straigh tforward case.

• When using its in a possessive sense, the apostrophe should be omitted. For example: This agreement has its advantages.

3. How effectively avoid Issues with miscellaneous clauses in contracts: focusing on proactive drafting

Miscellaneous or Boilerplate:

Provisions: a contract section that contains provisions addressing various general or standard terms that are not designated in other specific sections of the agreement.

Miscellaneous\Boilerplate:

• Severability;

• Force – majeure;

• Entire agreement;

• Governing law;

• Choice of forum;

• Modification/Variation of contract.

Should be analysed to ensure that its terms are appropriate in light of the particular transaction.

Contract Modification:

Case brief Rock Advertising Limited (Respondent) v MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited(Appellant) [2018] UKSC 24:

MWB Business Exchanges Centres Ltd (“MWB”) operates offices in London. Rock Advertising (“Rock”) entered into a licence agreement with MWB to occupy office space for a fixed term of 12 months. Clause 7.6 of the agreement provided: “This Licence sets out all the terms as agreed between MWB and [Rock]. No other representations or terms shall apply or form part of this Licence. All variations to this Licence must be agreed, set out in writing and signed on behalf of both parties before they take effect.”

Rock accumulated licence fee arrears. Rock’s director, Mr Idehen, proposed a revised schedule of payments to Ms Evans, a credit controller employed by MWB.

Adispute arose as to whether Ms Evans had accepted Mr Idehen’s proposal orally. MWBsubsequently locked Rock out of the premises, terminated the licence and sued for the arrears. Rock counterclaimed, seeking damages for wrongful exclusion from the premises.

In the County Court the judge found that the parties had agreed orally to Mr Idehen’s revised schedule; but the judge held that MWB could claim the arrears without regard to that oral variation, because the oral variation did not satisfy the formal requirements of Clause 7.6.

Rock appealed successfully to the Court of Appeal, which held that the oral variation had also amounted to an agreement to dispense with Clause 7.6. It followed that MWB was bound by the oral variation.

The main question of case:

Whether the NOM clause (No Oral Modification clause) is legally effective?

Judgement: The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal.

“If the parties agree that the written contract is to be the entire contract, it is no business of the courts to tell them that they do not mean what they have said.” (North Eastern Properties Ltd v Coleman [2010] 1 WLR 2715 at para 82).

Key points of court decision:

• If there is a nom clause, oral variations of the contract will be invalid, but they are not forbidden.

• As soon as oral variation was invalid, that makes it unnecessary to deal with the issue of consideration.

• “Nom clauses” are common, for at least three reasons:

1) they prevent attempts to undermine written agreements by informal means;

2) they avoid disputes;

3) they make it easier for corporations to restrict the internal authority to agree variations.

4. Legal Englis mistakes in corporate relations

Proper translation is important.

• Sheep – вівця.

• Ship— корабель.

• Bath, bathhouse, sauna -лазня.

• Відсотки (банківськи) – interest.

• Іncomestatement– звіт про прибутки та збитки.

• Articles of association, Charter– Статут.

• Share– акція, частка.

Common mistakesin translations:

1. Literal translation.

2. Errors in terminology, especially in specialised texts (legal, medical, technical).

3. Omissionof information- accidental loss of a part of the document.

4. Unnatural style or literal translation.

5. Spelling and punctuation errors.

Commonmistakesin translations- legal terminology in different legal systems:

Articles of assosiation, charter, bylaws, statute.

A company usually requires founding documents (which one can liken to a “constitution”) which defines the existence of the company and regulates the structure and control of the company. Sometimes, this is composed of two documents. The first specifies the company’s objects and powers and its authorized share capital. In the US, this is called the charter (or the “articles of incorporation”) and in the UK, this is called the “memorandum of association” The second document outlines the company rules for internal affairs and management, such as procedures for board meetings and annual shareholder meetings. In the US, this is called the “bylaws” and in the UK, this is called the “articles of association”.

The auditor's phrase ‘We have already seen your balance sheet’ was translated by a tired translator as ‘We have already seen your balance sheet, it's... so-so’ (the word sheet is consonant with shit).

Фразу аудитора «We have already seen your balance sheet» втомлений перекладач переклав як «Бачили ми ваш баланс, він... так собі» (слово sheet співзвучне з shit, «лайно»).

Невдача в перекладі звіту про прибутки та збитки обійшлася Sharp у мільйони доларів Наприкінці 2012 року, коли Sharp Corp. представила свій звіт про прибутки та збитки, перспективи були сумнівними, оскільки організація повністю відставала від електронних гігантів, постійно втрачаючи частку ринку. Коли Sharp попросили перекласти з японської на англійську фінансовий звіт, у перекладі йшлося про те, що вони визнають труднощі компанії як «суттєві сумніви» в тому, що організація може й надалі залишатися «постійною турботою». Мова в англійському перекладі звучала набагато приземленіше і похмуріше, ніж в оригінальній японській заяві. Згідно з перекладом, організація, по суті, передбачала свій кінець. Інвестори були в жаху. Акції Sharp впали набагато нижче, повністю впавши за рік на 75%.