Glossary entry (derived from question below)
Spanish term or phrase:
La parte demandada deduce tacha en contra de la testigo
English translation:
(BrE) The defendant/respondent enters a challenge of the witness
Added to glossary by
Natchile
May 30, 2013 07:45
10 yrs ago
17 viewers *
Spanish term
La parte demandada deduce tacha en contra de la testigo
Spanish to English
Law/Patents
Law (general)
La parte demandada deduce tacha en contra de la testigo María Rojas León en base a lo dispuesto en el
numeral 4º del artículo 358 del Código de Procedimiento Civil pues,
señala, ésta presta servicios remunerados y habituales a los
demandantes, hecho que por lo demás ha sido reconocido por la
misma, de hecho, realizó más de 10 informes.
numeral 4º del artículo 358 del Código de Procedimiento Civil pues,
señala, ésta presta servicios remunerados y habituales a los
demandantes, hecho que por lo demás ha sido reconocido por la
misma, de hecho, realizó más de 10 informes.
Proposed translations
(English)
| 3 +1 | (BrE) The defendant/respondent enters a challenge of the witness |
Adrian MM. (X)
|
| 3 +1 | The respondent OR defendant submits a motion to strike the witness |
Marie-Helene Dubois
|
Proposed translations
+1
5 hrs
Selected
(BrE) The defendant/respondent enters a challenge of the witness
... does challenge the witness.
The defence (team) in the UK can enter peremptory challenges of jurors/members of the jury or, as in the US, 'recuse' the judge.
NB striking the witness in the UK would mean hitting the latter.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 11 hrs (2013-05-30 19:04:58 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Impeachment is AmE for discrediting a witness, also - as an archaic BrE term for trying a Minister of the Crown and last used in the UK in 1805 - is still a procedure in the US for indicting a politician e.g. a misbehaving US President. Sandro T. would know the US witness angle better than me, but it's not used in England & Wales.
The defence (team) in the UK can enter peremptory challenges of jurors/members of the jury or, as in the US, 'recuse' the judge.
NB striking the witness in the UK would mean hitting the latter.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 11 hrs (2013-05-30 19:04:58 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Impeachment is AmE for discrediting a witness, also - as an archaic BrE term for trying a Minister of the Crown and last used in the UK in 1805 - is still a procedure in the US for indicting a politician e.g. a misbehaving US President. Sandro T. would know the US witness angle better than me, but it's not used in England & Wales.
Note from asker:
| Hi. Thank you very much for your help. I was wondering, do you know the difference between your suggestion and the term impeachment? Or is it just a different term for the same concept? |
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thank you for your hep!"
+1
1 hr
Marie-Helene Dubois
Spain
Spain
Native in English
Specializes in field
Spain
Word class
Native in: English 
Works in: Spanish to English, Dutch to English, French to English, and 1 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
60
The respondent OR defendant submits a motion to strike the witness
This is the Article of the Codigo de Procedimiento Civil (Chile) in question:
Art. 358 (347). Son también inhábiles para declarar:
4° Los criados domésticos o dependientes de la parte que los presente. Se entenderá por dependiente, para los efectos de este artículo, el que preste habitualmente servicios retribuidos al que lo haya presentado por testigo, aunque no viva en su casa;
The full text can be found here: http://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=22740
It is clear that in this case 'deduce tacha' means the same as a 'motion to strike'.
A motion to strike is a legal motion given by one party in a trial requesting the presiding judge order the removal of all or part of the opposing party's pleading to the court. A motion to strike is also used to request elimination of all or part of a trial witness's testimony. During a jury trial, if motion to strike witness testimony is accepted, the jury is instructed to disregard the stricken statements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_to_strike_(court_of_law)
You did not mention whether you "flavour" of English is US or BR. This can affect the terminology, certainly in legal translation, because the legal systems are different.
Also, just for future reference, I assumed the Spanish-language jurisdiction was Chile because of your profile name but this was quite a wild assumption. It helps if you specify the country when asking questions because for example the law can differ depending on these jurisdictions.
Art. 358 (347). Son también inhábiles para declarar:
4° Los criados domésticos o dependientes de la parte que los presente. Se entenderá por dependiente, para los efectos de este artículo, el que preste habitualmente servicios retribuidos al que lo haya presentado por testigo, aunque no viva en su casa;
The full text can be found here: http://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=22740
It is clear that in this case 'deduce tacha' means the same as a 'motion to strike'.
A motion to strike is a legal motion given by one party in a trial requesting the presiding judge order the removal of all or part of the opposing party's pleading to the court. A motion to strike is also used to request elimination of all or part of a trial witness's testimony. During a jury trial, if motion to strike witness testimony is accepted, the jury is instructed to disregard the stricken statements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_to_strike_(court_of_law)
You did not mention whether you "flavour" of English is US or BR. This can affect the terminology, certainly in legal translation, because the legal systems are different.
Also, just for future reference, I assumed the Spanish-language jurisdiction was Chile because of your profile name but this was quite a wild assumption. It helps if you specify the country when asking questions because for example the law can differ depending on these jurisdictions.
Note from asker:
| Thank you for your explanation, it was very helpful. And your right, I should've been more specific! My 'flavour' is BR English and you guessed correctly, this is a Chilean case. |
| Thank you for your explanation, it was very helpful. And YOU'RE right, I should've been more specific! My 'flavour' is BR English and you guessed correctly, this is a Chilean case. *sorry about the spelling mistake in the previous note! |
Something went wrong...