• slider image 62
:::
航運管理討論版

此賠償文章翻譯是否順暢

70884
2014-02-18 00:12 #
For this most unusual case, we have negotiated with the claimant, who has agreed to compromise with us in the amount of USD3,000 subject to a quick payment within this month. As the seal of container did't delivered in sound condition, we do not believe it possible to obatin further reduciton, we shall be pleased if you and your member will agree to settlement at the said amount for this case.Look forward to receiving your prompt confirmation

有關此不尋常的案件,我們已與原告協商,原告同意我們在此月立即給予他3,000美元的賠償。在貨櫃一開始非確實上封條的情況下,我們不相信有機會減少此賠償金額.,不知您和您的成員是否同意以上述金額和解,期待您的盡早回覆

不知大家看了是否有更好的說法或是哪句能修改的更好?
As the seal of container did't delivered in sound condition
是否也可以說是櫃門未鎖好?

有勞指正了,謝謝
l331206f
2014-02-15 19:32 #
[quote] 70884 寫到: For this most unusual case, we have negotiated with the claimant, who has agreed to compromise with us in the amount of USD3,000 subject to a quick payment within this month. As the seal of container did't delivered in sound condition, we do not believe it possible to obatin further reduciton, we shall be pleased if you and your member will agree to settlement at the said amount for this case.Look forward to receiving your prompt confirmation

有關此不尋常的案件,我們已與原告協商,原告同意我們在此月立即給予他3,000美元的賠償。在貨櫃一開始非確實上封條的情況下,我們不相信有機會減少此賠償金額.,不知您和您的成員是否同意以上述金額和解,期待您的盡早回覆

不知大家看了是否有更好的說法或是哪句能修改的更好?
As the seal of container did't delivered in sound condition
是否也可以說是櫃門未鎖好?

有勞指正了,謝謝[/quote] 通常貨櫃封條是在貨櫃門關上之後才加上去的。一旦加上貨櫃封條,該只貨櫃即無法再被開啟(除非將封條破壞)。 沒有封條仍然可以把櫃門關上,只是無法証明櫃門是何時關上的,也無法反駁該只貨櫃是否曾被打開過。
70884
2014-02-17 00:11 #
謝謝您的補充,所以依原文來說可判定此櫃在交到貨主手上時封條就已被破壞或是沒有,但不能知道是裝上船前就被破壞或是根本沒上封條而造成貨物損失。
這樣解釋是否有合理?
flagH8
2014-02-17 13:15 #
參照:

As the seal of container did't delivered in sound condition,


我有兩點要表達

第一 此句是被動式應該在文中說清楚
第二 封條是CY櫃重要的一個點, 因此此文中隱含的意思是
希望運送人如果提不出封條被破壞的進一步證據, 運送人只得接受條件理賠了, 這一點應該要表達出來

另外subject to是條件基礎
70884
2014-02-18 00:12 #
嗯,謝謝您的分享
:::

選單

討論區

新聞區

寫信給站長

誰在線上

6人線上 (2人在瀏覽討論區)

會員: 0

訪客: 6

更多…