一份已盖章协议的法律风险：从翻译视角看合同起草的严谨性

最近有个客户，拿来一份双方已经盖章的协议，让我评估中文译稿。我习惯先看原文，但扫了一眼英文，发现问题不小。

这说明一个常见却危险的情况：商业谈判结束了，法务审核却可能走了过场。一份有瑕疵的法律文件就此生效，给未来的合作埋下隐患。

协议原文

Due to the increase in raw material prices, Apex Steelworks Co. suffered severe losses. After negotiations with Banyan Industrial Holdings, an additional payment of $82,491.57 for PO-915B and PO-928C orders is required.Deducting the third batch of advance payment from Banyan Industrial Holdings, the advance payment of $82,491.57 for order number PO-945D will be used as an additional amount, and the first and second batches of orders(PO-915B, PO-928C) will be completed.

原文的问题在哪

这份协议条款不像出自专业律师之手，更像业务人员的邮件草稿。

1. 基础语法错误： 句首的 “Deducting…” 是一个悬置分词，逻辑主语不清。句子间的连接、标点和冠词用法也存在疏漏。
2. 逻辑混乱： 整个长句把几件事搅在一起——涨价背景、补款要求、资金来源、履约承诺。资金如何调配、行为的先后顺序，都描述得相当绕。
3. 表述模糊： “will be used as an additional amount” (将用作一笔额外款项) 这种说法，在法律上非常不精确。是补偿、价格调整还是预付款变更？定义不清，解释空间就大，争议的种子就此埋下。

原文质量如此，译文无论怎样修饰，都难以弥补其固有的法律缺陷。翻译的第一步，是先将原文的逻辑理顺。

第一步：理清逻辑，转为标准商务英语

我们先抛开法律的严谨性，把这段话改成一份清晰的商务备忘录。目标是让一个局外人也能立刻看懂各方要做什么。

修改后 (Corrected Version):

Due to rising raw material costs, Apex Steelworks Co. has incurred significant losses. Following negotiations, Banyan Industrial Holdings has agreed to an additional payment of $82,491.57 for purchase orders PO-915B and PO-928C. This amount will be covered by reallocating the advance payment previously made for purchase order PO-945D. Upon this fund reallocation, Apex Steelworks Co. will complete orders PO-915B and PO-928C.

修改要点：

• 主动语态：明确是 Banyan Industrial Holdings 同意付款。
• 词汇精确：用 reallocating (重新分配) 准确描述资金调配的动作。
• 结构清晰：拆分长句，按“背景 → 协议 → 执行方式 → 结果”的顺序排列，逻辑一目了然。

改到这一步，信息清楚了。但作为法律文件，仍然不够。

第二步：从商务英语到法律英语

现在，我们以律师的身份重写，目标是消除歧义、锁定责任、防范风险。

法律专业版 (Legal Version):

The Parties, Apex Steelworks Co. (“Supplier”) and Banyan Industrial Holdings (“Buyer”), hereby agree as follows:

1. Price Adjustment. In consideration of the increased costs of raw materials, Buyer shall pay Supplier an additional sum of USD 82,491.57 (the “Additional Payment”) for Purchase Orders PO-915B and PO-928C.
2. Method of Payment. The Parties agree that the Buyer’s obligation to make the Additional Payment shall be satisfied by the reallocation and application of the advance payment of USD 82,491.57, previously paid by the Buyer for Purchase Order PO-945D.
3. Condition of Performance. Upon Supplier’s confirmation of receipt of the reallocated funds, the Supplier shall be obligated to complete its performance under Purchase Orders PO-915B and PO-928C in accordance with their respective terms.

关键区别：

1. In consideration of (以……为对价): 这不是客套，是英美合同法的基石。明确“补款”是为了换取“供应商继续履约”，确保协议具备法律强制力。
2. shall (应): 法律文件中，shall 表示强制性义务，是“必须”，不是“将要”。Buyer shall pay (买方应付款)，责任清晰，无可推诿。
3. 义务的“清偿” (satisfied by): 精准定义了买方的付款义务如何被满足——即供应商成功收到那笔调配资金。
4. 先决条件 (Upon...): Upon Supplier's confirmation of receipt... (一旦供应商确认收到……) 这句话设立了一个履约前提：供应商的完工义务，在确认收到资金后才触发。这有效保护了供应商，避免了对方口头同意调拨资金、但资金迟迟不到账的风险。

翻译质量的天花板，是原文的水平。一份已经盖章的协议暴露出这样的问题，说明在合同管理环节存在漏洞。对客户而言，与其事后找翻译补救，不如在起草阶段就聘请专业人士，确保每一份签出去的文件都坚实可靠。