Cross-examining through an interpreter in international arbitration

“Reading the English is not checking the translation.” That distinction from John Anthony O’Shea’s article is crucial. A translation can be fluent, polished and entirely plausible—while omitting a qualification, overstating the certainty of the source or attributing to a document a proposition it does not actually support. Indeed, fluency can make an unreliable translation more dangerous by making it appear authoritative. In my work assessing translation quality on assignments delivered for the UK Ministry of Justice, this is precisely the distinction that matters: not simply whether the English or Ukrainian reads well, but whether it accurately reflects the source, in its proper context. Where translated material may influence legal advice, pleadings or litigation strategy, source-text verification is not a cosmetic final check. It is part of establishing the evidence on which the legal analysis rests. A very worthwhile warning for legal practitioners. #LegalTranslation #TranslationQuality

Expert Deposition Transcript Translation Catches Inevitable Deposition Interpretation Errors As we’ve blogged about before, deposing a non-native English speaker is a an artform.

Expert Deposition Transcript Translation Catches Inevitable Deposition Interpretation Errors As we’ve blogged about before, deposing a non-native English speaker is a an artform.

Expert Deposition Transcript Translation Catches Inevitable Deposition Interpretation Errors As we’ve blogged about before, deposing a non-native English speaker is a an artform.

225,773. That's how many times US federal courts needed an interpreter in fiscal year 2025, up from 196,155 the year before, and 148,379 the year before that. Demand has climbed every year. It spanned 149 different languages, though Spanish alone accounted for 96% of it.   The federal courts put it plainly: "The use of competent federal court interpreters in proceedings involving speakers of languages other than English is critical to ensure that justice is carried out fairly for defendants and other stakeholders."   In a courtroom, a competent interpreter isn't a courtesy.   This is the gap we close. 16,000+ professional interpreters in 300+ languages, ready when the docket is. Because being understood is the difference between following your own trial and only watching it happen.   Source: U.S. Courts (Administrative Office), Court Operations Annual Report 2025 and Federal Court Interpreters program.   #CommunicationAccess #CourtInterpreting #LanguageAccess #AccessToJustice #ProfessionalInterpreters #Interpreters

Does the Losing Party Have to Pay the Prevailing Party’s Costs for Deposition and Trial Testimony Interpreters? We’ve blogged about the fundamental difference between the legal document translators and the oral language interpreters outlined in Taniguchi v.

At the UK Supreme Court yesterday, arguable points of law were not the hardest things to interpret. At times, the jokes were. I interpreted consecutively between Ukrainian and English for judges from every level of Ukraine’s judiciary during their visit to the UK Supreme Court as part of a week-long training programme. My experience across court and arbitral settings has shown me how differently each forum tests the interpreter. Here, unlike in trial-level work centred on evidence and fact-finding, the discussion concerned the distinctive role of the UK Supreme Court—the UK’s highest appellate court, with jurisdiction extending across its three legal systems. Some interventions were long, requiring professional note-taking, sustained memory and a well-structured rendering. Others were brief, rapid and bilateral, demanding an immediate change of gear and constant agility in both directions. At several points, that agility was tested by humour. British understatement and Ukrainian humour often achieve their effect differently. A joke rarely survives literal transfer: the interpreter must preserve its intention, register and timing—preferably without interrupting the exchange to explain why it is funny. After more than two hours as the sole interpreter, I particularly valued the feedback from a judge of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, who commended my work and recognised the demands of the assignment. We then discovered that we had graduated from the same Institute of International Relations—and that the judge held qualifications in law as well as translation and interpreting, with some first-hand interpreting experience. Feedback carries particular weight when it comes from someone who understands the work from the inside. #ConferenceInterpreting #LegalInterpreting #UkrainianInterpreting

Dmytro Yakubovskyy MITI MCIOL MUATI is a full member of the UATI. His experience in interpreting and translation, which he generously shares, is invaluable. His insights into the profession are extremely useful for both newcomers and seasoned professionals.

Does the Losing Party Have to Pay the Prevailing Party’s Costs for Deposition and Trial Testimony Interpreters? We’ve blogged about the fundamental difference between the legal document translators and the oral language interpreters outlined in Taniguchi v.

Does the Losing Party Have to Pay the Prevailing Party’s Costs for Deposition and Trial Testimony Interpreters? We’ve blogged about the fundamental difference between the legal document translators and the oral language interpreters outlined in Taniguchi v.