Comments on: Case of the Day: Holt v. Kormann Rockster Recycler

By: Antonin I. Pribetic

Antonin I. Pribetic — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:58:08 +0000

Quebec Declaration under Article 5, para. 3:

“For Quebec, translation will be required in all cases where the recipient does not understand the language in which the document is written. All documents which commence actions must be translated. Summary translation of all other documents is acceptable if the recipient agrees. Translation is to be done into the French language; however, the Quebec Central Authority may, upon request, allow a translation in English at the condition that the recipient understands this language.”

http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=status.comment&csid=392&disp=resdn

Perhaps Kormann understands English or the plaintiff made a request to the Quebec Central Authority to allow the translation into English (or more accurately, to allow service of the judicial document in the original English).

By: Ted Folkman

Ted Folkman — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:44:46 +0000

Good point! But I don’t think it would have mattered. Kormann wasn’t arguing a lack of translation as a basis for setting aside the judgment. Anyway, suppose there had been no translation. The Quebec central authority could, under Article 4 of the Convention, inform the plaintiff that the request failed to comply with the Convention and refuse to execute it until the plaintiff provided a translation. But if the central authority went ahead and served the documents, and provided a certificate stating that it had effected service under Quebec law, I wonder whether it would be open to Kormann to argue that the lack of translation invalidated the service. My instinct is to say no (unless on due process grounds).

By: Antonin I. Pribetic

Antonin I. Pribetic — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:18:59 +0000

Was the California complaint translated into French?: http://www.justice.gouv.qc.ca/english/programmes/sneaje/quebec1-a.htm

“the judicial or extrajudicial document to be served, translated into French, in duplicate so a copy can be sent back to the requesting authority in order to permit that authority to identify exactly the document which has been served (article 3 paragraph 2);”