In Europe, different legal systems, expressed in a variety of languages and reflecting various legal families that have historically evolved in different contexts, coexist. Faced with this situation, the European institutions provide mechanisms to harmonize European contract law through directives. But such an undertaking does not always yield good results. The directives establish minimum standards. Therefore, if one bears in mind the ample legislative capacity that member states have, the member state transposition process often entails an effect contrary to that of harmonization. Problems arise with respect to the translation into the legal language of the transposing member state. These problems bring about the appearance of different and/or erroneous conceptions that do not necessarily coincide with the proposal of the directive or the rest of transpositions from other EU states. The result is a more or less harmonized notion that does not, however, spare the user of the legal system the obligation of investigating in each legal system to determine the range and meaning of contractual legal terms, tackling problems of definition and translation, interpretation and classification in the process. Seventeen European directives, fifteen Spanish laws that were transpositions of European directives, and some Catalan laws that also represented the transposition of European directives were the starting point for the study. The study attempts to offer an approach to these problems through the presentation of some significant examples and by offering an overview of the current situation. Some of the notions studied include: tradesman or businessman or professional; consumer; right of rescission, right of termination, right of voluntary dismissal, and contract of agency. By the end of the study, it has been made clear that juridical linguistic problems do arise in the process of transposing European directives on contracts to the Spanish legal system. These difficulties may be extrapolated to the remainder of the European legal systems. The consequence is a variety of different notions within the European Union, which represent a step backwards from the goal pursued by the community directives, i.e., the harmonization of member state legislation. However, the European institutions have also recognized this "juridical linguistic crisis," and, for the moment, have opted to draft a "Common Reference Framework." The Framework will have to precisely define the legal terms, enunciate the fundamental principles, and offer coherent models of contract law standards based on the accumulated knowledge of the Community and the best solutions to be found in member state legal systems.
