Marion Delarue (asker) Mar 22, 2016:

benefit = proceeds it makes sense

Tony M Mar 21, 2016:

@ MultiPro Sadly, that simply doesn't fit with the EN source text.

For one thing, there is no justification whatsoever for adding in a spurious 'having', turning this relatively technical, formal document into what would be an everyday, lay-person's expression.

Secondly, that simply wouldn't make sense in the context of the clause as a whole! There would be no logic whatsoever in forbidding a party from entering "into any arrangement under which money or the benefit of having a bank or other account may be applied, set off or made subject to a combination of accounts;"

How could one possibly "apply, set off, or make subject to..." the fact of having an account?!

Premium✍️ Mar 21, 2016:

Mon humble avis ... est qu'il faut interpréter "the benefit of a bank account" comme le "benefit of HAVING a bank account". Le gérondif est sous-entendu. C'est pourquoi j'ai suggéré la possession d'un compte bancaire, ce qui en soi octroie bien des privilèges, donc des avantages à tirer.
Quant aux désaccords dans ce forum, ils seraient plus valides s'ils étaient logiques, cohérents, impartiaux et non pas contradictoires comme il est malheureusement évident ici.

Tony M Mar 21, 2016:

@ A/T Yes, that is indeed the problem! However, I think in legal-ese, that's exactly what it would mean — unlike in laymans terms 'the benefit of having a bank account'; which after all, would be nonsenical in the context of the clauses here, where it is clearly being compared to 'money'.

AllegroTrans Mar 21, 2016:

Problem here does "benefit" effectively mean the "proceeds" of a bank account

Marion Delarue (asker) Mar 21, 2016:

ok, thank you Tony

Tony M Mar 21, 2016:

@ Asker You appear to be parsing it incorrectly, it needs to be understood as "the benefit of a bank account [or other account...]"