gelijk verhuurder aan huurder in huur zal geven

07:27 Apr 15, 2016 

I suppose that it is meaningful, in the sense that it is a way for each party to state its intentions/obligations. If the contract only contained sth like "lessor rents to the lessee", it would only be telling half the story, so to speak.

07:14 Apr 15, 2016 

Yes, you are 'for once'. Michael is right. The Lessor hereby lets or demises (vs. licenses or lends) to the Lessee. Rent is the other way round: the tenant from the landlord or -landlady. Rent out, whilst idiomatic on the Brit. Isles, is IMO a misnomer. But you are in good company: 'Look Back in Anger' playwright John Osborne who, in his autobiography, is oblivious to the word of letting, leaves readers wondering whether he was the tenant or landlord of many premises around South London. Ambiguously, past managing agents of my flat in West London once sent out a circular about flat owners (commonholders) 'renting their apartments' (letting their own flats to themselves, a bit difficult in EN law).

23:49 Apr 14, 2016 

and is redundant, but it is used quite a bit in Legal Land

23:47 Apr 14, 2016 

but English doesn't make this distinction. We would just say the lessor rents to the lessee.

23:41 Apr 14, 2016 

such as:

verhuurder verklaart hierbij te verhuren, gelijk huurder verklaart te huren, ... =
the lessor hereby lets, and the lessee rents ...

Verhuurder verhuurt aan Huurder, gelijk Huurder in huur aanneemt ... =
The Lessor leases to the Lessee and the Lessee leases from the Lessor ...

etc.

so, in yr example:

gelijk verhuurder aan huurder in huur zal geven

would be sth like

and Lessor leases to Lessee