This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
troubles esthésiques coméens
mode de paiement payant

Glossary entry

French term or phrase:

avantage réellement procuré au fonds emprunteur

English translation:

benefit actually procured for the borrowing fund

Added to glossary by patfie
Jul 26, 2023 15:49
10 mos ago
30 viewers *
French term

avantage réellement procuré au fonds emprunteur

French to English Law/Patents Finance (general) Marriage
Dans un contrat de mariage:
La créance sera égale à la plus faible des deux sommes que représentent la dépense faite et le profit subsistant, ce dernier représentant l’avantage réellement procuré au fonds emprunteur au jour du règlement de la créance.

Autre exemple:
Il résulte de ce texte, d’une part, que la récompense est égale au profit subsistant quand la valeur empruntée à la communauté a servi à améliorer un bien propre à un époux qui se retrouve, au jour de la liquidation de la communauté, dans le patrimoine de ce dernier, d’autre part, que le profit subsistant, qui représente l’avantage réellement procuré au fonds emprunteur, se détermine d’après la proportion dans laquelle les fonds empruntés à la communauté ont contribué au financement de l’amélioration de ce bien propre.
Proposed translations (English)
3 +2 benefit actually procured for the borrowing fund
3 +1 benefit actually accruing to the borrowing fund
4 -1 benefit effectively counterbalancing the shortfall of the matrimonial pool of assets
Change log

Aug 6, 2023 16:44: patfie Created KOG entry

Discussion

patfie (asker) Jul 26, 2023:
Here's the whole section from the contract CREANCES ENTRE LES CONJOINTS
Les conjoints peuvent avoir des créances entre eux, ce sont des créances résultant de transferts de valeur réalisés entre Ieurs patrimoines propres respectifs.
Elles sont considérées comme exigibles dès Ieur naissance.
Le montant des créances personnelles que les conjoints pourront avoir l’un contre I’autre au cours du régime est fixé conformément aux dispositions de I article 1469 du Code civil.
La créance sera égale à la plus faible des deux sommes que représentent la dépense faite et le profit subsistant, ce dernier représentant l’avantage réellement procuré au fonds emprunteur au jour du règlement de la créance. Elle ne peut, toutefois, être moindre que la dépense faite quand celle-ci était nécessaire. Elle ne peut être moindre que le profit subsistant, quand la valeur empruntée a servi à acquérir, à conserver ou à améliorer un bien qui se retrouve, au jour de la liquidation du régime matrimonial, dans le patrimoine emprunteur. Si le bien acquis, conservé ou amélioré a été aliéné avant la liquidation, le profit est evalué au jour de l'aliénation, si un nouveau bien a été subrogé au bien aliéné, le profit est évalué sur ce nouveau bien.
Mpoma Jul 26, 2023:
Also confused So first we have something from a marriage contract... but using the term "fonds emprunteur". And then in the "other example" (example of what?) we have something talking about "communauté". So is the context still marriages? Coz in that case communauté is going to mean "jointly owned estate" (i.e. property jointly owned by both spouses).

I'm struggling to understand what is meant by fonds emprunteur: in the context (saugrenu) of a marriage contract I'm tempted to think this expression means "the joint estate of the two spouses". In which case, in the eventuality of divorce, the situation is pretty clear.

But why use such an an expression as "fonds emprunteur"? Is this from a DOM-TOM (this designation may have been superseded, can't remember...) or somewhere outside mainland France?

MORE. CONTEXT. Purrr-lease.
philgoddard Jul 26, 2023:
I think the problem is we don't have the text that precedes both of these paragraphs, so we don't know exactly what it's about.

Proposed translations

+2
6 mins
Selected

benefit actually procured for the borrowing fund

The claim will be equal to the lower of the two sums represented by the expense incurred and the remaining profit, the latter representing the benefit actually procured for the borrowing fund on the day of settlement of the claim.
Peer comment(s):
neutral philgoddard : I'm just not sure about 'borrowing fund'.
5 mins
I'm also not sure
agree Daryo : the "borrowing fund" being the "personal fund" of the spouse who borrowed from the "joint fund" OR from the other spouse's "personal fund". // CL5 about that
2 days 24 mins
agree Yvonne Gallagher : with Daryo re "borrowing fund"
4 days
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Thank you"
+1
1 hr

benefit actually accruing to the borrowing fund

Peer comment(s):
neutral philgoddard : This is basically the same as the previous answer.
3 hrs
agree Daryo : "accruing" might in fact be a better option
5 days
Something went wrong...
-1
17 hrs

benefit effectively counterbalancing the shortfall of the matrimonial pool of assets

Methinks: a plus or credit added to *equalise* the debit / minus balance of the inter-spousal pool or (pace AT) 'community' or joint tenancy (an archaic Eng. land law term that is anathema to many ProZ translators)= joint ownership of (AmE) marital (BrE) matrimonial property.

One spouse's expense is the other's credit.

'Comme pour les récompenses, le profit subsistant en matière de créances entre époux représente « l'avantage réellement procuré au fonds emprunteur », c'est-à-dire l'enrichissement dont a bénéficié le patrimoine débiteur. Dans notre affaire, la cour d'appel s'emmêle les pinceaux dans le calcul de ce profit.'

This is one instance where our long-lost Canadian and US American (strictly in alphabetical order) Attorneys-at-Law might be able to procure added legal value: 'US Am Law Dictionary' -> Tenancy by the Entirety between spouses: 'the husband and wife are said to be 'seized as one person'. .. A divorce severs the tenancies by the entireties and usually creates a tenancy in common (NB separate ownership)'

IMO a kind of negative-equity scenario between husband and wife.
Example sentence:

. Is an inter-spousal gift, acquired by the donor other than as a gift or inheritance from a third party, part of the pool of matrimonial assets liable to be divided ?

Reference:

http://www.efl.fr/actualite/depense-correspond-creance-entre-epoux_fed3db332-3b0e-4954-ba7e-776452d3460f

Peer comment(s):
neutral Mpoma : "matrimonial pool of assets" is a nice expression, but I don't think this is the gist. It is talking about "profit actually made", despite the existence of mortgages specifically on real property... I don't see any evidence supporting your "narrative".
29 mins
neutral philgoddard : I think you're on the right lines here, but I lost patience with your incomprehensible explanation.
2 hrs
disagree Daryo : can't see any "counterbalancing" in this ST - only the obligation of the spouse who borrowed from the common pot to add the attached "profits" when reimbursing the "loan".
1 day 7 hrs
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search