Albon (t/a NA Carriage Co) v Naza Motor Trading Co Sdn Bhd [2007] EWHC 9 (Ch),
[2007] 2 All ER 719.

Albon (t/a NA Carriage Co) v Naza Motor Trading Co Sdn Bhd (No 3) [2007] EWHC
665 (Ch), [2007] 2 All ER 1075.

Al-Naimi (t/a Buildmaster Construction Services) v Islamic Press Services Inc [2000]
1 Lloyd’s Rep 522, CA.

Предполагаю, что это "trading as". Поскольку и Albon, и Al-Naimi - это, скорее всего, люди (адвокаты, представляющие интересы истцов), то, наверно, "выступающий от имени (представляющий [интересы]..."

Заранее спасибо.

Спасибо

1.
The UK Supreme Court Clarifies the Proper Test for Dishonesty to be Applied in Criminal Proceedings Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd. trading as Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67

2.
Ivey (Appellant) v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords (Respondent)
Neutral citation number
[2017] UKSC 67

Искал формулу, по которой строятся названия судебных дел/решений.

XX vs YY (t/a ZZ),

Пожалуйста еще примеры, все гуглятся:

a1) Warner-Lambert Company LLC (Respondent) v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan
a2) Appellant(s): Generics (UK) Limited (trading as Mylan)

b1) Timothy Martin Hemming, trading as ‘Simply Pleasure Ltd’ and others v Westminster City Council
b2) Timothy Martin Hemming (t/a Simply Pleasure Ltd) and others v Westminster City Council

Timothy Martin Hemming, trading as ‘Simply Pleasure Ltd’ and others v Westminster City Council и

Timothy Martin Hemming (t/a Simply Pleasure Ltd) не подводят к пониманию того, что означает trading as (кроме как выступающий от имени)...

В Британии "trading as" значит, что есть юридическое лицо Romashka LTD, но на рынке оно действует под торговым названием Bob's Flowers. Также как и у нас, собственно. У Romashka LTD могут быть еще какие-нибудь Susan's Flowers, Boris' Pets и т.д.

Так бы и переводил "компания Albon (действующая под торговым названием NA Carriage Co)"

In considering Albon (trading as NA Carriage Co) v Naza Motor Trading Sdn Bhd ([2007]

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0ad41e84-f684-46dc-9135-e749183f7297

Albon не адвокат, а директор компании. Т.е. представитель в суде.

2000- Company House listed Nigel Albon, Company Director "NA Carriage Company", wife Kankamol Albon as Company Secretary

http://www.bures-online.co.uk/smallbridge albon/albon.htm

вы уверены, что это правильно в плане "кто на ком стоял"?

"Albon (t/a NA Carriage Co)" - правильное написание, а вот "Timothy Martin Hemming, trading as ‘Simply Pleasure Ltd’" - глупость, потому что к делу не относится. Проститутка Иванова, с кличкой "Роза Кисловодская".

Trading name и название компании написаны в скобках. Мистер Albon не имеет кличку "NA Carriage Co". Он истец. Если бы он выступал от своего имени, то написали бы "Albon v Naza Motor Trading Co". Но поскольку он представляет компанию, в которой является директором, то в скобках добавили название этой компании. Да,"t/a NA Carriage Co" поясняет торговое название компании, но это не торговое название самого Албона.

Итого:

Albon (t/a NA Carriage Co) - Албон (представляющий NA Carriage Co) против ХХХ.

"Here at The Sheriffs Office I am always stressing to our clients how important it is to make sure the information on the debtor is accurate and complete when obtaining a judgment and subsequently enforcing it, but even more so when dealing with a sole trader, partnership or limited company that is “trading as”.

Make sure the information on the debtor is accurate when obtaining a judgment and enforcing it, especially when dealing with a sole trader, partnership or limited company.

Where you are dealing with a sole trader or a partnership, ensure that you name not just the entity they are trading as, but each and every individual running the business. This will enable you to enforce against the assets of either the trading entity or, if it has no assets or has ceased trading, you can then still enforce against the individuals.

With limited companies, it is also important to put both the limited company name and the trading as name in the judgment and subsequent writ, so that you have covered all bases. This is particularly true of restaurants which are almost always owned by a limited company with a different name to the restaurant.

Check who was the owner of the trading as entity at the time you supplied the goods or services. If the business has changed hands, but still using the same trading name, you must ensure you sue the correct entity. We would always advise that you check their terms and conditions before you agree to supply the goods, so you know who you are supplying. It is, of course, also good business practice to run a credit reference at that time, possibly asking for trade references as well.

There are also instances where the limited company has gone out of business, but the directors have started a new company and are still using the same “trading as” name. Unfortunately, there is little you can do in the instance to enforce against the original company you supplied, but by checking their status at Companies House before embarking on legal action, you can save yourself the cost involved.

Finally, if you are suing a trading as name, ensure that you put the words ‘A Firm’ in brackets after the name."
http://thesheriffsoffice.com/articles/suing_a_trading_as_business

ПЛЮС

"Can we amend judgment given against sole trader business so we can enforce against the sole trader personally?
Anonymous (Private practice)
Q:
We have been asked to assist on a matter where a client sued a business and obtained judgment. His action was against X (X being a trading name for an unincorporated sole trader). He is now taking enforcement action and the sheriff's office has indicated that it is only able to enforce against the assets of the business X, and cannot take action against the sole trader in his personal name. As far as I can see we will need to make an application to the Court to amend the name of the defendant to "Joe Bloggs (trading as X)". Do you agree that this is the way forward. There are no limitation issues."
http://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/3-522-2768?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&comp=pluk&bhcp=1

но на месте Alex16 я бы заглянул на форум русскоговорящих юристов и уточнил формулировку.

смысл в том, что Albon может возглавлять не одну, а несколько компаний, и поэтому в суде важно указать, от имени какой компании он выступает.