On misfeasance, browsewrap and exhaustion or the fruits of summer school

 

[Exhausted man in office*]

For many non-retail businesses, August is a sleepy month, to put it mildly. In Israel, it even used to be called the “season of cucumbers”, the equivalent of the English "silly season",  due to its lack of relevant news. For me, this August is no different. Thus, I have directed some my spare time to reading the law digests I receive every week and don’t read. After all, continuing education is an essential task for any professional, legal translators included. Not being an attorney, I discovered some new terms, specifically misfeasance trading, browsewrap and horizontal and vertical exhaustion. I may or may not encounter them in the future but, in the meantime, it is fun to learn new terms.

In Wright vs Chappell, the court found the directors guilty of misfeasance trading as compared to wrongful trading. The former implies that directors breached their duties, including in regard to compensation, conflict of interest, due diligence and creditors. The former refers to actual trading when the directors know a company is not solvent. Clearly, both offenses refer to illegal acts, but the malfeasance is easier to prove.

Of a wider impact was the California Appeal Court decision regarding browsewrap, which refers to the “I agree” clicks on websites. The decision affirmed, among other arguments, that a clause stipulating arbitration was not enforceable if a “prudent user” would not have noticed it. This line of thought reminded me of the various “plain English” laws for consumer contracts that require key elements to be visually highlighted. To be clear, it did not say that these Internet agreements were non-valid but only that the site must present them properly.

I was quite fascinated by the discussion of horizontal and vertical exhaustion. These terms do not refer to the effects of training for the decathlon but instead to the conditions for applying for secondary insurance benefits. In many insurance policies, it is impossible to initiate a claim under a secondary insurance policy until the full payout, exhaustion, of all primary policies. That is horizontal exhaustion. By contrast, if an insured party has reached the limits of one of many primary policies, it may receive the benefits from a secondary policy under that same exhausted policy whether or not it has completely collected the benefits from the other primary policies, i.e., vertical exhaustion. Even if that sounds tiring to understand, the knowledge may be useful in the future.

For those busy in August or, even better, on vacation. I wish you happy days. For those waiting for the phone to ring physically or virtually, even if you know everybody else on too busy working or playing to need your services, August is a great time to gather “useless” knowledge. Nobody knows when you may need it, especially translators.

* Picture captions allow the blind to fully access the Internet.

Picture credit

Legal translation – Ignorance is not bliss

 

[Prague library*]

Translators, like countless other professionals, seek niches that offer higher rates and provide some protection against incursion by new technology, including ChatGPT. One tempting area of translation specialization is legal documents, whose major challenge seems to be its terminology. This barrier can be overcome with a little time and effort. However, in practice, the requirements for effective legal translation involve more than terminology and include actual knowledge of the law, which is vital in the understanding, writing and QA of legal language. In other words, when choosing a legal translator, actual study of the law should be a determining factor.

To clarify what I mean my study, the process can take on many forms, including law school, guided course and informal study. Clearly, having completed law school provides a clear advantage not only in terms of credentials but also knowledge. The law school graduate has an understanding of the logic and underpinning of legal reasoning. Even one year of law school, as I have, provides a certain amount of preparation for legal translation as I generally understand what the lawyer intends to say in the document. A person can also attain this same knowledge through online courses and specialized YouTube video series that cover specific legal topics in detail. Of course, unguided reading of law books or even exposure to legal language through parents can also be effective. In any case, the key is attaining accurate understanding of what contracts and other legal document can and should say.

This knowledge is vital because attorneys, at least in theory, say what they mean. It is the job of the legal translator, especially when working across different legal systems, to transmit that content without fundamentally adding or subtracting from it. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to understand the explicit and hidden text. For example, the word shall in English legal texts means to have a legal obligation, with no implication of the future, while may indicates a legal option, not probability. Likewise, the presence or absence of certain terms in US contracts, partially regulated by the UCC and relevant law, has a completely different impact than that same situation in civil code countries, where the contract essentially expresses differences from the model in the relevant national codex. For example, the absence of a termination date in a contract invalidates it in the US but implies an automatically renewing contract in most European countries. Even court systems vary significantly in terms of names and jurisdiction from system to system and even country to country. The choice of the court name is vital importance in understanding the document. Knowledge is key in transmitting the intention of the writer.

Even with an understanding of the content, a legal translator should produce a document in the correct style for the target audience. Each country has its “legalese”, often characterized by foreign words, a formalized sentence structure and fillers. For example, English uses Latin, active sentences and, at least formally, strives to remove redundant terms. Legal Hebrew, by contrast, distinguishes itself by using Aramaic words and quoting the Bible and is marked by constant inflation in terms of the number of words in a decision. French legal texts almost never use a “low” word when a sophisticated term is available and seem to embrace ambiguity as an art form, at least in my opinion. Thus, literal translation of a text, even if correct in terms of content, creates a document suitable for understanding only with little resemblance to a proper text in that language.

The knowledge of content and style come into the forefront when checking the translation before submitting it to the customer. Generally, the last step is a read-through of the text without looking at the source text. The purpose of this stage is to identify logic errors, whether created by the writer or translator, and improve style. Without knowledge of what should be, it is impossible to achieve either of these goals. Simply out, a qualified legal translator identifies logical and stylistic glitches in the text before sending to the customer, where such errors can lead to serious consequences.

Some would argue that experience is equivalent to study. However, without formal feedback, translators, like most people, tend to believe that “it sounds good” because it sounds like what they have done for the last decade. Alas, even if legal language were constant over time, experience only attests to efficiency, not accuracy. As Steven Erikson wrote, “tradition is the last bastion of fools”, or in the case of legal translators, just because nobody corrected an error ten years ago does not necessarily it was ideal even at the time. There is no replacement for proper study.

The need for translators to find a profitable niche has never been as strong as today. Actual knowledge should guide this selection as discretion is the better part of valor. Translators should avoid subject matter they don’t understand in the same manner they avoid languages they have never studied. My bank account and work schedule would be much fuller if I translated medical material as my wife does but I have learned not to touch it as I really don’t understand biology and medicine. Translators, like all professionals, should work with their strengths both in terms of language and content. For those interested in becoming legal translators, the best strategy is first gain knowledge of law because the results will generally reflect understanding.

* Picture captions help the blind fully access the Internet.

Picture credit

Watch your tongue – critical safety guidelines for translators and editors

 

[leopard sleeping in a tree*]

Translators and editors are often called upon not only to correct texts but to make judgments about their writers. They even sometimes do so on their own volition. These assessments can potentially expose these linguists to a charge of defamation in certain circumstances. As I learned at an excellent webinar presented by Galit Golan , advocate, of the law firm of Firon and Associates, in Israel professional critiques enjoy significant projection from the charges of defamation but involve some care when choosing the actual words. This issue is relevant when performing professional services  and also when “entertaining” colleagues with awful examples and warning them of potential dangers from perspective customers. The key is careful consideration of any such comments.

In Israel, defamation involves several elements, primarily the sharing of information with another party that could objectively humiliate or harm the third party. Israeli law does protect certain circumstances, most notably when the receiving party has the authority or obligation to receive that information. Most interestingly, once defamation is established, the court can award up to 79,000 NIS, almost 22,000 USD, (as of this year) to the damaged party without the latter having to prove damages. Clearly, given the complexity of the matter, in the case of doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.

As relevant to translators and editors, the issue can arise when completing QA and translation test assessment forms. To demonstrate, in a case involving a chef sending the management a picture of a member of the kitchen staff taking a nice nap under a tree, the court found the hotel and chef guilty of defamation not because of the picture since the chef had an obligation to inform the employer. Instead, the court found cause in the sarcastic caption under the picture, which mentioned the need to purchase a mattress for the employee. Likewise, it is the clear duty and obligation of the linguists to note all linguistic errors, whether objective or style, as well as answer any specific question regarding the overall level. Thus, it would be appropriate to write “The translators lacks sufficient knowledge in the subject matter to properly translate such texts” if the facts back up this conclusion. However, it may be dangerous to write “the translator has no understanding of the source language” as the provided sample does not justify that conclusion and may harm the career of the translator. When so requested by relevant parties, only relevant criticism advisable.

Considering the same case, linguists should be careful when sharing “funny” examples of poor translations or awful writing. Many translators share photos of amusing menu items and tourist site signs. In their basic form, these posts are merely publicizing public information, objective truths. However, if the posting party adds a comment such as “I hope the restaurant pays its chefs more than it paid its translators”, defamation may become an issue as the post goes beyond the linguistic disaster in the restaurant menu to question the quality of its food. Again, think before you post.

Of critical importance to freelancers, including translators and editors, is the sharing of information on problematic customers. The legimitate purpose here is prevent others from having the same unpleasant experience. In this regard, one of the cases brought up in the webinar is illuminating. A teacher received compensation after the letter to the parents specified conviction as the reason for dismissal instead of police investigation, which was the actual case. When colleagues request feedback on a specific agency or translator, whether privately or publicly, it would be advisable to stick the facts and avoid making general conclusions. For example, it would be apparently be acceptable to state the agency only paid after four months but riskier to write” the agency is a poor payer”, as the writer cannot justify the comment without checking with most if not all the translators working with it. Without the ability to prove a statement that may harm the third party, the warning party may be exposed to a defamation complain in Israel.

Clearly, every country has its own rules for defamation. Moreover, only legal experts can properly analyze any specific set of facts. However, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of care. Translators and editors should be very careful in how they write their critiques, however justified they may be, and avoid overreaching. As linguists have sharp pens, we need to watch our tongues.

* Picture captions help the blind fully access the Internet.

Picture credit

Stretching the law – Applying old law to modern realities

 

[Tortoise and hare*]

Reality and law are a bit like the hare and the tortoise. While the former advances at breakneck speed, the other crawls forward at its own pace, seemingly oblivious to time. The intersection of new reality and antiquated law often requires courts to apply great creativity in applying statutes whether in terms of scope or extension.

A curious example was the case of the woman recently sentenced to one year in jail and ordered to pay 30,000 USD in restitution for entering a store in March of 2021 and intentionally coughing, spitting on merchandise and yelling that she had the Corona virus and people were going to die. She was drunk at the time and later regretted the incident but these are sensitive times. See here for more details. The interesting aspect of this case was that she was convicted of making bomb threats, a felony. I suppose the charge of endangering public health would have also applied but probably carried a lesser punishment. Given the fact that until now only governments had been involved in biological weapons, it is not surprising that no statute specific for intentional disease spreading. I would have to agree that telling people that they would die of Corona is a quite a bomb threat.

An older threat is the Nigerian scam, which involves informing people by email that they have been awarded money in order to get them to reveal their bank details. It is not an accident that that these scammers are generally not physically located in the United States. The Mail Fraud Statute dates from the late 19^th century while the US Government enacted the Wire Fraud statue in the 1950's, both quite a while before the Internet and email. However, they are written quite broadly. They require the use of mail or wire communication, the intent to defraud and material deception. (For more details see here.) The courts have found it quite easy to extend its provisions to email crime. After all, the only difference is the letter e. US law is often written quite loosely in order to cope with future changes and avoid the continuous need to amend laws.

A more complicated challenge arises when the law is specific but the structural reality has changed. For example, when the US Constitution was finally ratified with all its amendments in 1790, the British and, consequently,US, legal system consisted of two parallel systems applying common law and equity, respectively. In overly simple terms the former could decree punishment while the latter could issue injunctions. The 6^th amendment to the US Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial for the former but not the latter. Two changes occurred: the US and UK  merged these courts; and new modern crimes emerged. For example, when the SEC was formed to regulate the stock market in 1934, it had the power to prosecute financial crimes and demand both fines and injunctions. The issue of whether the defendant is entitled to a jury trial has kept the US courts of appeal quite busy. For example, in 2016, a Ninth Circuit Court opinion, in the case of U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jensen, following precedence, transposed the distinction to modern times and ruled that when a legal remedy (civil fines) is involved, the right to a jury trial is relevant. See here for more details. In other words, they acted as if the trial had occurred in 1790. There are several other areas of law where US judges act on the same basis.

So, while watching the speedy rabbit of reality may be fascinating in its own way, observing the plodding legal system cope with reality is no less captivating, albeit frustrating at time. I assume that other legal systems face the same problem and cope with it in their own way. Law truly stretches the mind.

* Add captions to picture help the blind access the Internet. Picture credit: Image by <a href="https://pixabay.com/users/stephenwheeler-23068626/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=6570775">StephenWheeler</a> from <a href="https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=6570775">Pixabay</a>

Service providers, beware!

 

[Oliver Twist asking for more*]

Many single-person service providers, like mortgage requesters, face the prospect of having contracts forced upon them. These contacts tend to be several pages long and written in small print. For some, including quite a few translators, they may be written in a foreign language. In any case, the offering party, often agencies, have gate-keeper power to provide or not provide work. Given the difficult financial times and lack of knowledge of legal matters, most service providers sign these agreements blindly.

To be fair, most of these contracts are boiler-plate and define the necessary conditions for a work relationship, albeit using a plethora of fancy words. These matters include the type and quality of work, payment procedures and definition of the employer/employee relations or a lack thereof. These terms are legitimate and mandatory. Occasionally, the agreement creates an unreasonable period without direct competition or direct work with the end client. These points can be negotiated or even accepted if the service provider does not care.

However, of a more serious nature, before signing any such agreement, freelancers and even very small companies must read the liability section very carefully as it is a matter of potential financial disaster. I am not referring to the data security clause, whose risks is manageable, but instead to the general liability section.  In far too many agreements, the service providers are made liable for ALL direct and indirect losses that may arise from breach of ANY of the provisions of the agreement. Note that this liability is applied to each and every term and explicitly vague. This is dangerous because theoretically these small service providers could literally lose their house if an error in their work caused damages in the millions. I know of one case in which a translator had to pay for reprinting an entire run of brochures when a translation error was discovered. In simple terms, signing such an agreement exposes the business to bankruptcy.

The risks may seem very limited. Clearly, this clause is very rarely enforced and not even enforceable in some cases due to the doctrine of inequality of bargaining power. Neither do double sixes occur often in backgammon but why would a person choose to risk losing their house? Admittedly, professional liability insurance is available in many but  far from all countries. However, its cost may be prohibitive to many freelancers and small businesses. Finally, many entrepreneurs balance the risk versus the potential benefits and revenue and decide that the latter heavily outweighs the former. However, it is difficult to properly assess the strength of each factor as they are based on the future. Therefore, in my opinion, agreeing to such an option is poor judgment.

The best response is a polite request to add one sentence to the liability clause: Service provider liability is limited to the amount of the invoice. This limit expresses the service provider’s willingness to accept responsibility, i.e., lose the value of the entire project, while keeping the amount in proportion.

My wife and I have several years of experience insisting on this term with good results. First, many project managers actually have never read the service agreement themselves. Also, as professionals in the same field, they can relate to our concern. In small companies, the agreements were often taken from online boiler plate contracts without paying great attention to the details. So, the agency has no problem adding the requested proviso. For bigger companies, their legal department may enjoy the original wording but the business department quite often but not always persuades them that hiring is a trained professional is more important than a uncertain chance of collection. The limited liability clause has been mutually acceptable in a vast majority of the cases.

This success could be even further improved with more awareness by service providers. Given the relative power of a single agency as compared to single freelancer, the loss created by not attaining the services of a single service provider is quite minimal. However, if an ever-increasing number of freelancers so insisted, the current loss of insisting on complete liability would exceed its potential benefit. There is strength in numbers.

However, to create this power, service providers must be like Oliver Twist and ask for more. Like him, we are entitled to reasonable conditions and freedom from the threat of losing our home. Service providers, beware: do not agree to unlimited liability to all breaches of agreement!

*Picture captions are vital for the seeing impared. 

Supreme difficulty

One of the main pleasures of legal translation is the story. Specifically, because there is a dispute, each side argues its point of view. This discussion is often fascinating and illuminating. Of course, the peak of such argumentation involves decisions of the Supreme Court.  Since I translate from Hebrew into English, I have learned the discretion can be better part of valor when it comes to taking on translation of Israeli Supreme Court decisions.

As compared to the structure of the American legal system, the Israeli Supreme Court is much more active and controversial. The reason is that a petitioner can access the high court in two manners. The court serves a court of last appeal, as in the United States. In addition, any citizen whose rights may be in danger of being breached may directly petition the Israeli Supreme Court to request a court order, which must hear the case, unlike in the United States. This is someone similar to the American process of filing a request for a restraining order in a state or federal district court. However, the Supreme Court has more freedom and thus can issue new interpretations of the law. Since these “emergency” situations generally involve complicated situations, such as immigration or destruction of property, the results of these appeals are of interest to both the legal and general community.  To give an example, if Benjamin Netanyahu succeeds in forming a government after the March elections, the Supreme Court undoubtedly will undoubtedly have to decide whether a prime minister, as compared to a minister, under indictment can legally serve, an issue regarding which current Israeli law is silent. Therefore, decisions of the Israeli Supreme Court are almost always relevant and controversial.

The justices must be extremely erudite. As a crossroads of multiple cultures and regimes, Israeli law is strange mélange of legal principles. In the United States in the states of Louisiana and Hawaii, certain matters actually follow the principles of Napoleonic and native law, respectively. In Israel, the situation is much more complex. Modern Israeli law, enacted since 1948, governs many but not all matters and is often vague or incomplete, whether intentionally or unintentionally. The regulations applying these laws sometimes take years to enter the books, complicating the issues even more.  The British ruled the territory from 1918 to 1948 and established many basic laws, some of which have not been replaced. The Ottomans ruled the region from 1517 to 1917 and had a complete set of laws. Unfortunately, the Turkish rules still have a strong influence on the procedures of land ownership. Even more relevant, religious laws still regulate marriage and divorce (but not custody) to the point of the existence of a separate special religious court system for Jews, Christians and Muslims, all applying ancient law. If none of these sources are clear, judges can refer to either modern American law, which does have a strong influence on legal reasoning, or, paradoxically, ancient Jewish law. To explain, the Halacha and Talmud, to name just the main sources, are interpretations of the Bible, similar to the body of interpretations on the Universal Commercial Code (UCC) in the United States.  Any decision supported by reasoning from these deeply respected sources has great weight. So, Israeli judges must have broad knowledge, way beyond current Israel laws and regulations.

Adding to the fun of reading and translating the decisions of the Israeli Supreme Court is the sheer number of languages that must be taken into account. Israeli law is in Hebrew. The application of the British colonial laws requires solid knowledge of English. Furthermore, many terms in Turkish law still are used in Israeli law, such as tabu, meaning registered ownership of land. Applying Islamic law requires knowledge of Arabic while Talmudic law requires understanding of Aramaic, an ancient language related to Hebrew. As American and British law traditionally use Latin terms to render the language fancier, judges must also be thoroughly familiar with that language. So, the learned judges of the Israeli Supreme Court must have thorough knowledge of Hebrew, English, Turkish, Aramaic, Latin and even sometime Arabic legal language.  It should be noted that many do not hesitate to demonstrate this mastery in their decisions.

Thus, the intrepid translator, facing some 200 pages or more of legal arguments from this huge corpus of sources, has to understand and transmit their meaning into English. For this reason, I have the greatest respect for those that successfully and artfully translate Israeli Supreme Court decisions into English.  I personally will only translate decisions up to the appeals court level and leave the Supreme Court decisions to the supremely talented and knowledgeable few who can properly handle them.

The meaning of it all

I recently participated in an international conference at the University of Haifa entitled Legal Language and Discourse 6.  For four days, experts in wide variety of fields with a wider variety of perspectives discussed a seemingly simply issue: what does a word mean?  The answers to that question are far from academic and have had a major impact on people’s lives.

For example, Prof. Lawrence Solan brought up the tricky issues of whether the qualifier using a weapon in a drug offense includes exchanging drugs for arms and carrying a weapon includes it being in a car. The answer is yes for both cases according to the Supreme Court. In a Jewish context, there were opposing view between Prof. Berachayahu Lifschitz and Mr. Moshe Ovedia whether Jewish rules of life should be based on the words or spirit of the written text of the bible.  In other words, what does the prohibition on spitting on Shabbat have to do with a day of rest?

The conference was enriched by a plethora of Chinese speakers providing their own point of view on both Western and Chinese law. It was intriguing to Chinese judges construe the meaning of the facts. According to Professor Le Cheng, the issue of pornography is reflected by how the judge chooses to describe the photograph of an apparently naked body artist. Prof. Zhang Luping discussed the term hearsay, noting that the statement “she said that she was the Pope” is admissible in reference to the mental state of the speaker.

Many lecturers discussed the role of the English language in the law. Of special interest was the speech of Prof. Halina Sierocka. She presented the challenges and success of the legal English program at the University of Bialystok. Given the importance of English as a lingua franca in international law, she highlighted the uneven but significant progress in Poland in terms of mastering legal English as well as the issue of bilingual legal studies. On the same note, Prof. Powell, who teaches law in several countries in Asia, provided a detailed survey of legal English in Asia, noting the practical implications of using English in each country. A group of Polish speakers, participants in an ongoing project to create a comprehensive international data base of law language, outlined the initial steps already taken in this direction.

One of the strangest themes, albeit unintentional, was that a word sometimes means, as Alice says, exactly what I intend it to mean. According to Prof. Dennis Kurzon, Henry VI interpreted the term malice to mean doing anything he disapproves of. Likewise, as explained by Xin Wang, there is very little domestic violence crime in the People’s Republic of China but there are problems of unacceptable behavior.

I have only mentioned a few of the lectures and apologize to those who I left out. With all this discussion of words and their meaning, I must add that the words exchanged by the participants during the breaks, meals and trips enriched the meaning of international communication, appreciation of cultural diversity and recognition of universality. For that in particular, I wish to thank Prof. Sol Azuelos-Atias for organizing the conference. 

California Hope

Recently, I have spent time in the hospital with close family members suffering from UTI’s (Urinal Track Infection) in Israel and California. I will relate the differences in the hospital environment as the Japanese treat height differences: the person next to the tall one, i.e. accentuating the positive.

California, with all its problems, often is willing to invest in a vital need even if the budget is tight.  For example, under current California law, a nurse in a regular ward takes care of no more than four patients.  In practice, this meant that the nurses treating my father were attentive and patient. They were able to use their sense of humor to lower high tension situations.  Not only that, the fact that the ward was equipped with electrical IV pumps meant that they did not have constantly check the IV flows of their patient.  This meant that even at the end of their 12 hours shifts, they were pleasant and professional.  As has been said about going to prison, the punishment is being to the hospital; no more is needed.

On the same note, it should be noted in California’s favor that, albeit imposed by the judicial system, the prison system is finally starting to try to treat the sources of problems of its inmates instead of just incarcerate them.  Granted, there is a large disproportion between the amount of available resources and scale of the problem. However, there is no doubt some prisoners are not born criminals but instead people that need help. 

Alas, nothing is perfect. The condition of LA roads continues to shock and distress.  The veins and arteries of Los Angeles are truly clogged by cholesterol of awful surfacing (as well as cars of course).  The state government could clearly do a better job maintaining them.

California is well known for being ahead of its time in terms of seeking solutions. The development for electrical cars began as a mandate from California decades ago when it realized that it could never really “beat” air pollution over the long term. This attitude is clearly preferable, as an example, to that of the government of Venezuela, which has decided to deal with the problem of high inflation (68% annually) by not publishing inflation data. It would be funny if it was not tragic.

(Small) Legal Culture

Culture is a word of many meanings.  To some, it means knowledge of literature and art.  With a small “c”, it implies the stated and unstated norms of behavior for any given group.  Recently, I had the pleasure of suing someone in Israeli small claims court.  I had taken someone to small claims court many years previously in the United States.  This experience was quite difference.  To clarify, having appeared in other court proceedings beforehand, I can attest that small claims court is unique and does not represent the general court atmosphere in Israel.

I will begin with a serious of random observations of our hour in court:

-             -  The judge was constantly giving orders to the clerk even during our “hearing.”

-             -  The judge immediately sent two cases to on-site mediators to reach an agreement.

-             -  The judge, when she did give us her attention, was not interested in our remarks, immediately sending us outside to reach a practical solution.

-             -  When we reentered the court room, she was out, in a meeting.  Another judge, much more serious, then entered to decide an urgent matter of custody.

-            -  Upon her return, she proceeded to resolve and provide instructions for the five cases in the various stages of settlement that were pending, including ours, while also giving instructions to the two mediators.

-            -   One of the cases involved an Arab young man who, during a race, has his car banged in by another driver.  The latter did not show up, which resulted in a heavy fine against the absent party.

-             -   The various parties wore jeans, disheveled shirts and sneakers, except for the lawyers outside who wore ties and white shirts.

This short slice of life demonstrates several aspects of Israel.  Israelis love to negotiate, treating law as merely another tool or, as they would say half-jokingly, the law is only a suggestion.  The judge as well as the involved parties ignored the absolute meaning of justice and sought only a reasonable compromise that leaves no party feeling completely defeated. By contrast, the failure to show up was severely chastised by the Court as a lack of respect of both the court and the parties.  Finally, the judge’s multitasking shows the wonderful Israeli way of trying to be efficient by solving many problems simultaneously.  As usual, I am not completely convinced that it is more efficient than handling one case at a time, but that is the local custom for all types of service.  By the way, as for our case, the store was ordered to repair the defective furniture with a date and time set, which is not exactly what we wanted, as well as damage award of ¼ of what we requested.   I suppose the entertainment value made up for the rest of it.