aperçu des réponses au questionnaire accompagnant la ... - HCCH

Question Réponse / Reply État / State
Eventually, it should be decided ultimately by the Central Authority, and, in any case, restricted to cases in which
the forwarding authority has justified the addressee’s sufficient knowledge of the language in which the document is
drafted.
We should consider dropping the translation requirement only in respect of non-judicial documents. Irlande
We believe that the criteria for determining the necessity and degree of translation that is required, is ultimately to
be viewed under the standard of due process. That is, so long as the document or forms have been sufficiently
translated into English to enable the recipient to understand the nature of the papers and the
proceedings under which they have been issued, a less than complete translation may be acceptable. In
many circumstances the summary of the document is quite cursory and, even if translated into English, may not
provide adequate information to meet the minimum due process that a recipient of a service of process is entitled.
Again, because of the liberal use of alternative service channels for service in the United States which does not call
for translation, parties wishing to avoid the inconvenience of a translation can do so readily. Service made under
these informal vehicles, if voluntarily accepted without compulsion by the recipient, will generally be considered
effective, unless expressly challenged subsequently by the recipient and under the factual circumstances presented,
can be shown to have denied that party applicable due process.
[F] Québec : En ce qui concerne la procédure introductive d'instance, la traduction de tous les documents doit être
exigée. Dans les autres cas, la traduction des "Éléments essentiels de l'acte" peut suffire, si le destinataire y
consent. IPE: Une traduction intégrale est nécessaire. Alberta : Non, ce n'est pas toujours nécessaire d'avoir
une traduction intégrale; un résumé du contenu de l'acte devrait suffire.
[E] Québec: In the case of originating proceedings, the translation of all documents must be required. In other
cases, translation of the “Essential Elements of the document” may be sufficient if the recipient consents. PEI: Full
translation is necessary. Alberta: No, it is not always necessary that there be a full translation; a summary of
the document’s contents should be sufficient.
Full translation.
Chine (Macao): […] A summary could raise more difficulties and doubts leading to delays.
Ukraine: […] Otherwise, the documents can be served only if it is accepted by the addressee.
The requirement for translation goes into the direction of the receiving authority “protecting” the interests of the
addressee on its territory, rather then the requesting State´s obligation to observe some kind of due process in
relation to the addressee. If that is the underlying philosophy than the document should be translated in full.
Etats-Unis
Canada
Bélarus, Chine (Macao),
Italie, Luxembourg,
Pologne, Portugal,
Ukraine
Rép. Slovaque
Yes. Koweït
The translation requirement should not only refer to the document to be served itself, but also to its
attachments. They are an essential component of the document and must be able to be understood by the
addressee just as much as the document itself. However, the Central Authority itself cannot always assess the
extent and accuracy of translations. Therefore, it is up to the addressee to submit a complaint to the foreign court of
any incomplete or poor translations. In so far as it is being considered to deviate from Art. 7 in future by
requiring the inclusion of a translation of the summary on the request for service (information on the essential
content of the document), and to do so contrary to the current provision of Art. 7, whilst alternatively, however,
omitting translations of the documents to be served, this does not seem prudent. For our reasons, reference is
made to the explanations provided under 9.1. The forms themselves (pre-printed portion) are subject to the
provisions of Article 7 of the Convention.
This question should be studied more closely. However, where obligatory service is requested it is our view that it
is important that the addressee understands the documents served on him. In these cases, it would not be
Allemagne
Norvège
Page 32 of 69