Legal documents must accomplish one thing above all: Clear wording prevents any room for interpretation. Sometimes, this can lead to odd sentence structures, and the results aren’t always perfect. In many cases, an imprecise translation opens up leeway that can have fatal consequences.
Some errors were discovered in time. Others have severely damaged companies or even led to war and destruction. History is full of examples of how much damage can be caused by poor or unclear translations of legal texts such as contracts, laws or other documents. Here are ten particularly striking cases.
#1 When poor translation prevents free trade
In 2011, a free trade agreement between the EU and South Korea failed due to the poor translation of a treaty. There were exactly 207 reasons for this collapse. That’s how many translation errors were found in the Korean version. A Korean newspaper listed some of them: “transplantation”, for example, was translated as “transfusion”. “Epidemiology” somehow mutated into “skin care service”. There were also instances where elements had been omitted from the translation or added at will. In seven cases, the word “any” was omitted from negative sentences. The text also contained 16 Korean grammatical errors. The newspaper was also quick to point out that an external specialist had been paid the equivalent of $27,503 for the final review. The journalist’s conclusion: “Most of the errors were close to amateur level English.”
#2 One little word causes political unrest
In the end, even the foreign minister had to step in to explain what had happened. In August 2008, the French government under President Nicolas Sarkozy presented a peace plan to end the Caucasus War between Russia and Georgia. France’s Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner admitted in September that they found several translation errors, one of which in particular led to considerable diplomatic problems: The Russian version of the text referred to the “security of Abkhazia and South Ossetia”, while the English version, which was sent to Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, was presented as “security in Abkhazia and South Ossetia”. A tiny mistake that completely changed the original intention of the peace plan and caused fierce irritation between the involved parties.
#3 A translation error costing 760 million dollars
A case from 2006 illustrates the financial repercussions that incorrectly translated terminology can cause. Ecuador had expropriated a stake held by the Texan oil company Occidental Petroleum. However, Ecuador inadvertently breached an agreement and therefore had to pay compensation. Although both sides reached an agreement, the damages awarded to Occidental were raised by 40% (or USD 760 million) due to poor legal translations from Ecuadorian case law into English. This issue was triggered by the question of whether the term “solemnidades” should be translated as “legal requirements” or “formal requirements”. Although the 40% increase was ultimately rescinded, the costs of the proceedings alone were enormous.
#4 The contract that never materialized
Sports history is full of translation errors – no wonder, considering the international dimension of the sport. Most of the fails are quite funny, but sometimes they can have serious implications. Take Ecuadorian professional soccer player Bryan Cabezas, for example, who was supposed to be loaned from Atalanta Bergamo to Argentinian soccer club Independiente in 2018. Although all parties were in full agreement, the transfer still fell through. Apparently, the contract was machine-translated, which consistently turned Bryan Cabezas (the Spanish word for heads) into Bryan Heads. Unfortunately, this meant that the contract and transfer were a waste of time.
#5 One legal system, two terminologies, many legal texts
In countries with two or more official languages, legal texts can also lead to problems caused by translation errors. A well-known example was provided by bilingual Canada, where the error was apparently discovered before it could cause any damage: The English version of a segment of criminal legislation referred to “sexual assault”. In the French version, however, the translators used the term “attentat à la pudeur”, which is more akin to “indecent behavior”. A small mistake that could have led to completely different interpretations or even judgments in criminal law practice.
#6 Legal translation in the EU: Service in 24 languages
Things get even more complicated when it comes to EU law. Every official or legal text must be published in all official languages of the EU – currently a whopping 24, which keeps translators quite busy. One well-known example of a poor translation concerned a form for the European Certificate of Succession. In it, the English term “heir” was translated as “albacea” in the Spanish version. Unfortunately, “albacea” is the executor of the will, which means that the rights and obligations in the event of an inheritance were distributed completely differently. This epic fail has also been corrected since then.
#7 A single translator destroys a nation
It has never been clarified whether English missionary Henry Williams made a mistake or whether he deliberately translated misleadingly. In any case, the consequences were catastrophic. On February 6, 1840, the United Kingdom and the Māori people signed the Treaty of Waitangi, which, among other things, promised the people of New Zealand security and property protection. According to the English version, the Māori were to “cede absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of sovereignty to Her Majesty the Queen of England”. The Māori version only referred to governance, not sovereignty. While there were other issues, this treaty is often blamed for the resulting armed conflicts, expropriations, and ultimately the cultural identity loss of an entire people. The Treaty of Waitangi is considered one of the most devastating political mistranslations in history.
#8 Translation of treaties: Who speaks for the emperor?
And another treaty that brought anything but peace: On May 2, 1889, Italy and Abyssinia (today’s Ethiopia) signed the Treaty of Wuchale. The Italian version of the treaty stated that instead of the Abyssinian emperor, Italy would henceforth be responsible for representing Abyssinia to other states as a traditional protectorate. The version for Emperor Menelik II read differently: It merely stated that he could ask to be represented by Italy but was not obligated to do so. In this case, it is not entirely known if the translator acted deliberately or if he lacked understanding of the legal terminology. In 1896, the Italians were defeated in the Battle of Addis Ababa during the first Italian-Ethiopian war. And with it, the ill-fated treaty was history.
#9 Why your financial report should always be professionally translated
By the time the company realized the mistake, the damage had already been done. In 2012, electronics group Sharp published a financial report with a negative cash flow. In the original Japanese version, however, Sharp emphasized that there were “no doubts about the continued existence of the Group”. Unfortunately, the English version of the report reported “considerable doubts”. Although the correction was made very quickly, the company was unable to put the genie back in the bottle. Within a day, the share price dropped ten percent and the damage to the company’s image was also staggering.
#10 Professional translations affect politics: Cold war with translation errors
In times of great mistrust, precision and correct wording are extremely important in legal texts such as international treaties. When the Charter of the United Nations was enforced on October 24, 1945, the Cold War was only a few years away. Article 51 of the document states: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations (…)”. However, in earlier Russian versions, the aspect of the individual right to self-defense took a back seat to that of collective defense. The difference in the Russian target language was particularly significant given the fact that the Soviet Union traditionally insisted on collective measures and approval by the Security Council. The debate was primarily complicated by Article 111 of the UN Charter, according to which the five official language versions – English, French, Spanish, Chinese, and Russian (later also Arabic) – have equal validity in the event of a dispute. Maximum accuracy and certification by a professional translation agency really do carry geopolitical weight at this level.
