Search

Language and jurisprudence are deeply interconnected. The legal terminology of any language as well as the legal system itself is a result of “a historical evolution which did not happen on its own, as if in a vacuum, but in constant interchange with other legal languages and legal systems”1. Contemporary jurisprudence faces a lot of new opportunities and changes. Increasing globalization breaks down all the barriers via the “dédaublement du monde”. It involves the reconstruction of all spheres of life. Within the framework of globalizing changes Europe is facing the tendency “to draw up a uniform law on the basis of work by experts in comparative law and to incorporate it in a multipartite treaty”2.The creation of uniform legal system presupposes the change of terminological landscape. Therefore, the comparative study of juridical terms and suppositions regarding new translational tendencies acquire the greatest urgency. The give paper deals with the study of the Swiss “trust-like mechanisms”. The major emphasis is put on the actual problems emerged during the translation of terminological units related to such juridical institutions as the “Fiducie” and “Treuhand”.

“It is at least possible that the trust will in the 21st century join those other English inventions, such as football and the steam engine, which have swept the world”1.The given optimistic definition of common law “trust” enables us to regard it as a unique legal instrument. However, its origin is the source of numerous debates of the scholars of the world. Scientific literature presents three theories concerning the origin of the “trust”: Roman, Germanic and Islamic. Until the nineteenth century, it had been believed, that the trust had been modeled on the Roman legal institution “fideicommissum”. However, by the nineteenth century, the given theory was replaced by the new assumption, which proposed, that the Salic “Salmannus” had been a predecessor of the “trust”. The debates about the origin of this institution were fueled by the fact, that the English “use” (an initial form of the trust), the Roman “fideicommissum” and the Salic “Salmannus” had the same cause of emergence: they emerged as a “result of positive-law deficiencies and restrictions concerning the ownership and devolution of property”2 during those times, when the land was the principle form of wealth. The given paper presents an attempt to highlight the existed theories about the origin of the “trust” and make new conclusions on the basis of in-depth terminological analysis. Synchronic and diachronic approaches initiate insights into the juridical and lingual developments.

Globalization - a complex system of innovation, internationalization and rapidly growing interdependence – plays the greatest role in the formation of today’s world. It enters different spheres of human life and stipulates the uniformity of economy, law, business and even, political life. In the framework of global processes, a lot of changes can be seen in the legal systems of European countries. The given paper discusses the formation of the Romanian “fiducia” and the Georgian “საკუთრების მინდობა” (sakutrebis mindoba – means “trust”) under the influence of Anglo-American “trust”. The term “trust” generally nominates an institution of Anglo-American law, which is irreplaceable in the cases when the real owner of the property must be substituted by the nominal one (trustee) for carrying out civil relationships. This concept originated in the English Common law, but has been constantly rejected by the European continental legal systems (Civil law). The main obstacle laid in the fact, that Anglo-American legal system was based on the duality of ownership, which was almost unacceptable for the continental law-governed countries. However, in the recent years, the growing importance of the American capital markets popularized the utilization of “trust” and stipulated its insertion in some “rigid” European jurisdictions. Moreover, some world countries have already indirectly allowed mechanisms similar to the “trust”. Among them are Romania and Georgia. The given research is dedicated to the precise description of the Romanian and Georgian “trust instruments”. It singles out major terminological units and underlines the fact that newly-established mechanisms have to undergo several stages for turning into faithful reflections of the original model of “trust”.

Problems associated with the transference of the property acquired pressing urgency with the change of political life of Georgia (from Socialism to Capitalism). The drastic changes of Georgian political and economic systems cause the creation of new institutions. On-going processes influence the sphere of law and its terminology. The establishment of new legal institutions facilitates the emergence of the so-called “empty gaps” – the unnamed elements of the system of concepts. Therefore, it is of particular importance to formulate the system of basic terminological units and clarify their precise meaning. The given paper offers the comparative analysis of the terms related to “wills” and “trusts” in Georgian and English languages according to the data of the contemporary monuments of law. It shows the similarities and differences of Georgian and English terminological systems. Therefore, the necessity of the creation of new lexical units (in order to “fill” the so-called “empty gaps”) is singled out and revealed.

An “all-embracing” process of globalization stipulates the formation of today’s globe. It enters different spheres of life and facilitates the uniformity of economy, law, politics, language and even, cultural life. In the framework of globalization, drastic changes can be seen in the legal systems of some European countries. The given research tries to answer the demands of the modern epoch. It describes the process of the emergence of the European modifications of “trust”, singles out major concepts presented in the Latvian, Romanian and French trust mechanisms and underlines their significance in today’s world. The given research is a presentation of the new outlook of the development of “trust-like” institutions of some European countries.