1. Distinctive features of
LEGAL ENGLISH
Brescia,
Dr. Teresa Magno

2. LEGAL VOCABULARY 3 MAIN CATEGORIES OF LEGAL VOCABULARY
TECHNICAL TERMINOLOGY (e.g. alimony, litigation, distraint)
SUBTECHNICAL TERMINOLOGY (e.g. service, hand)
GENERAL TERMS (e.g. witness, judge)

3. Specific features of the vocabulary of LEGAL ENGLISH
Great degree of formality Use of archaic and formal expression (e.g. whilst) Compound prepositions and adverbs such as herein (in this document) and thereafter (after that, in the future) Words of a higher registry: to deem (to consider), expedite (hasten), to append (to attach) Nominalization (use of nouns instead of verbs) Post-modification (use of modifier that follows the word or phrase it limits or qualifies)

4. POST-MODIFICATION
1. Prepositional phrases (e.g. the boy in the blue shirt; the house on the corner) 2. –Ing prahses (e.g. the boy talking to me) 3. Relative clauses (e.g. the woman who discovered the corpse) 4. That clauses (e.g. there was a suggestion that evidence had been tampered with) 5. –To infinitive phrases (e.g. He need someone to talk to) More than one modifier (e.g. an eight-year old boy with a gun who tried to rob a sweet shop)

5. Features of EU LEGAL ENGLISH (1)
LEGAL VOCABULARY
1. SINGLE AND MULTI-WORD TERMS belonging to the EU legal context (e.g. offence categories of the EAW: facilitation of unauthorized entry and residence, forgery of means of payment, laundering of the proceeds of crime)
2.SEMI-TECHNICAL TERMS (e.g. prescription v. statute of limitations; proceeds from crime v. products of crime)
3.LEGAL TERMINOLOGY used in both UK and EU law English (e.g. names of offences: arson, counterfeiting, fraud, swindling)
4. GENERAL TERMS used with a specific meaning in EU legal context (e.g. instrumentalities, mutual legal assistance)
Slightly less formal as opposed to Legal English
Mindful choice of words taking into account the draft and translation of treaties and EU instruments into EU official languages and, where necessary, into non-EU languages (Chinese, Arabic, Russian)

6. Features of EU LEGAL ENGLISH (2)
LEGAL SYNTAX
COMPLEX SENTENCES: ARTICLE 7 OF THE DIRECTIVE ON THE RIGHT TO INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS on Record-keeping
Member States shall ensure that when a suspected or accused person has been subject to questioning or hearings by an investigative or judicial authority with the assistance of an interpreter pursuant to Article 2, when an oral translation or oral summary of essential documents has been provided in the presence of such an authority pursuant to Article 3(7), or when a person has waived the right to translation pursuant to Article 3(8), it will be noted that these events have occurred, using the recording procedure in accordance with the law of the Member State concerned.
USE OF THE PASSIVE (stress on the result of the action rather than on the agents)
VERB TENSES: PRESENT SIMPLE (events happening now or regularly), PRESENT PERFECT, PRESENT CONTINUOUS (an event happening in this moment; used to report on future, planned events), PAST SIMPLE.
VERBS OF ENACTING: auxiliary verb SHALL for POSITIVE OBLIGATION, SHALL NOT for NEGATIVE OBLIGATION
Art.4 of the Legal Aid directive: Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused persons who lack sufficient resources to pay for the assistance of a lawyer have the right to legal aid when the interests of justice so require
VERBS USED FOR DEFINING OR CREATING OR DEVELOPING

7. Features of EU LEGAL ENGLISH (3)
COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings
Article Subject matter and scope
1. With a view to achieving the objective set out in Article 1, this Framework Decision establishes a framework on: (a) a procedure for establishing contact between the competent authorities of Member States, with a view to confirming the existence of parallel criminal proceedings in respect of the same facts involving the same person; (b) the exchange of information, through direct consultations, between the competent authorities of two or more Member States conducting parallel criminal proceedings in respect of the same facts involving the same person, in case they already have knowledge of the existence of parallel criminal proceedings, with a view to reaching consensus on any effective solution aimed at avoiding the adverse consequences arising from such parallel proceedings.

8. Thanks for
your kind attention