JUNIOR LAWYERS DIVISION
Lost in Translation? Interpreters and Family Courts Aysel Akhundova
I
n 2011, 8% of the population did not consider English their main language. At the time, that constituted approximately 4.2 million people.1 Since then, migration has been on the rise. The year 2019 saw 642,000 people move to the UK2. Non-EU migration has been gradually increasing since 2013 and is now at its highest level since 2004. In 2015, there were 19,548 completed requests for interpreter services in the civil and family courts in the UK.3 This of course, did not include privately booked interpreters. Pair all of that with the fact that the number of family law cases has been on the rise since 2016, with 266,059 cases started in 20194 alone and you can safely assume that many people require the help of an interpreter at court. Back in 2015, a non-party costs order was made against Capita for its failure to provide interpreters on seven occasions in one case.5 The case brought some much needed attention to the issues of interpreters in our justice system. The recurrent issues of interpreters not showing up for hearings resulted in one of two catastrophes; either an unjust hearing where a party did not comprehend what was happening or an adjournment causing further delay in the interests of justice. Undeniably, the role of an interpreter at Court, especially in translating oral evidence is critical. Yet while interpreters must pass the relevant examinations, have the relevant qualifications and training, the quality of the interpretations could be the luck the draw. Some may misinterpret a key word thereby changing the whole meaning of a sentence, others may summarise thereby omitting something key. Most errors, undoubtedly, slip through the net as often there is no one else (bar the party and interpreter) present who speaks the language. There are a myriad of difficulties and potential issues that may arise. These include, but are not limited to: nuances in language, sayings in native tongue which do not translate well, no equivalent word or phrase in each language. The intended meaning may differ greatly from a literal translation and a balance must be struck between the two; a task much easier said than done. Translate too literally and risk a complete misunderstanding, translate the believed intended meaning and risk translating erroneously. In one case, an allegation was raised that the father had tied the mother to a chair. A simple question was raised during crossexamination: ‘did you tie the mother to a chair?’ The father, answering through his interpreter, responded ‘no, we do not have chairs at home, only arm chairs’. The word for arm chair was completely different to chair in the native tongue. The father
believed he was being factually accurate in responding to the question. The Judge, was not too pleased with the response… There is, of course, also the issue of tone. It is safe to say that tone and emotion are not directly translatable. While sometimes that may be beneficial, other times, concerns are raised that an interpreter adds a level of distance to the Courts ability to consider the evidence. Safeguarding against such issues is difficult but awareness of potential issues is the first step. Some suggestions to protect yourself from the common issues are: ■ If possible, try and arrange for the interpreter to attend Court in good time so that them and the client can find a ‘common language’ and ensure they understand each other well; ■ If possible, briefly explain the case to the interpreter so that they are aware of the facts, position and key issues in dispute; ■ If the client speaks a good level of English and feels comfortable listening and answering questions, allow them to do so but ensure the interpreter is engaged and on standby to translate where and when necessary; and ■ Try and make sure that all parties and representatives speak slowly and take pauses to allow for adequate interpreting time.
Aysel Akhundova Solicitor Dawson Cornwell
1. 2011 Census 2. ONS Migration Statistics Quarterly Report: February 2020, Mike James 3. MOJ ‘Statistics on the use of language interpreter and translations services in courts and tribunals’ Statistical Bulletin, 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2015. Published 21.04.2016 4. Family Court Tables: October to December 2019 – GOV 5. In the matter of Capita Translation and Interpreting Limited [2015] EWFC 5
CENTRAL LONDON LAWYER | 25
