LEG 8.3. – Conditionals: Third Conditional
FORM
If + the past perfect tense, + would have, should have, could have, might have + past participle (V3)
If my client had shared all the information with me, we would have won the case.
USES
1 Speculating about the past
We use the third conditional to talk about past situation that did not happen and the consequences if they had happened.
If the ROI (return on investment) had been higher, our client would have invested in your start-up.
If they had anticipated the crash, they wouldn’t have lost so much money.
The merger could have succeeded, if the management styles hadn’t been so different.
The presentation might have been better, if she had felt more confident.
Note that in American English would have is possible in both clauses:
I would have told you, if I would have known earlier.
In British English it would be:
I would have told you, if I had known earlier.
2 The use of inversion in the third conditional
In formal legal and business English, you can use inversion instead of „if” by reversing the subject and auxiliary verb. This structure eliminates the word „if” and creates a more formal tone.
Had + subject + past participle (V3) + would have, could have, might have + past participle (V3
If the lawyer had reviewed the contract, the error would not have occurred.→ Had the lawyer reviewed the contract, the error would not have occurred.
If they had raised more capital, they could have launched earlier. → Had they raised more capital, they could have launched earlier.
If the negotiations had started earlier, we might have reached an agreement.→ Had the negotiations started earlier, we might have reached an agreement.
EXERCISE 1
Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants, also known as the McDonald’s coffee case and the hot coffee lawsuit, was a highly publicised 1994 product liability lawsuit in the United States against the McDonald’s restaurant chain.
Read the text about the case and choose the correct form of the verbs in brackets.
The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck (1912–2004), a 79-year-old woman, suffered third-degree burns when she accidentally spilled coffee in her lap after purchasing it from a McDonald’s restaurant. She was hospitalised for eight days, followed by two years of medical treatment. Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses. When McDonald’s refused, Liebeck’s attorney filed suit accusing McDonald’s of gross negligence.
Liebeck’s attorneys argued that, at 180–190°F (82–88°C), McDonald’s coffee was defective, and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment. The jury found that McDonald’s was 80 percent responsible for the incident. They awarded Liebeck a net $160,000 in compensatory damages to cover medical expenses, and $2.7 million (equivalent to $5,000,000 in 2021) in punitive damages, the equivalent of two days of McDonald’s coffee sales. The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to three times the amount of the compensatory damages, totalling $640,000. The decision was appealed by both McDonald’s and Liebeck in December 1994, but the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.
The Liebeck case is cited by some as an example of frivolous lawsuit, and ever since, the “Stella Award” has been given to any wild, outrageous, or ridiculous lawsuits — including some infamous bogus cases.
YOUR SCORE(S) IN THIS EXERCISE:
You must log in to see your results.
EXERCISE 2
Inversion in third conditional sentences. Choose the correct sentence.
Had the client reviewed the contract thoroughly, they would have noticed the error.
Had the client reviewed the contract thoroughly, they would notice the error.
Had the witness testified earlier, the court decision might have been different.
Has the witness testified earlier, the court decision might have been different.
Had the company fulfilled its obligations, the joint venture would not have been terminated.
Had the company fulfill its obligations, the joint venture would not have been terminated.
(…)
YOUR SCORE(S) IN THIS EXERCISE:
You must log in to see your results.
Kapcsolódó tartalmak:
8.1. - Conditionals: First Conditional
8.2. - Conditionals: Second Conditional
8.4. - Conditionals - Mixed conditonals
YOUR PROGRESS MAP IN THE "LEGAL ENGLISH GRAMMAR" COURSE
LEG 1.1. – The Present Continuous Tense
LEG 7.1. – The Passive Voice: Present Tenses
LEG 8.1. – Conditionals: First Conditional
LEG 8.2. – Conditionals: Second Conditional
LEG 8.3. – Conditionals: Third Conditional
LEG 8.4. – Conditionals: Zero and Mixed Conditionals
Lingua Juris Szaknyelvi Központ
Tulajdonos: Connect Europe Bt.
Levelezési cím: 1027 - Budapest, Medve u. 23.
Telefon: 06 1 783 1339,
Mobil: 06 20 340 9278
Email: info@linguajuris.hu
Pontjaim
