Gitt at vedtektsendringen blir godkjent, oppdaterer forretningsføreren vedtektene.

Gitt at means given that, provided that, or assuming that.

In this sentence, it introduces a condition:

• Gitt at vedtektsendringen blir godkjent = Provided that / Assuming that the amendment is approved

It is a bit more formal than hvis (if). In everyday speech, many speakers might more naturally say:

• Hvis vedtektsendringen blir godkjent, ...

So gitt at is correct, but it sounds somewhat formal or administrative.

Blir godkjent is a passive construction and means is approved.

Breakdown:

• blir = becomes / is
• godkjent = approved

Together, blir godkjent literally works like gets approved or is approved.

This is a very common way to form the passive in Norwegian:

• Søknaden blir behandlet = The application is being processed / gets processed
• Planen blir godkjent = The plan is approved

So in your sentence, the focus is on the amendment receiving approval, not on who approves it.

This is because Norwegian follows the V2 rule in main clauses: the finite verb usually comes in second position.

The sentence starts with a fronted conditional clause:

• Gitt at vedtektsendringen blir godkjent

Because that whole clause takes the first position, the verb in the main clause must come next:

• oppdaterer = second position
• forretningsføreren = subject after the verb

So:

• Gitt at ..., oppdaterer forretningsføreren vedtektene.

If there were no fronted clause, you would normally say:

• Forretningsføreren oppdaterer vedtektene.

This inversion is very important in Norwegian.

They are related, but they do not mean the same thing.

• vedtektsendringen = the amendment to the bylaws/articles
• vedtektene = the bylaws/articles themselves

Breakdown:

• vedtekt = a bylaw, statute, or article of association
• endring = change, amendment

So:

• vedtektsendring = amendment/change to the bylaws
• vedtektsendringen = the specific amendment

Meanwhile:

• vedtektene is the plural definite form of vedtekt
• it means the bylaws or the articles

So the sentence says that if the amendment is approved, the manager/administrator updates the bylaws themselves.

Forretningsføreren is the definite form of forretningsfører.

It usually refers to a person or entity that handles administrative or business management tasks for an organization, housing cooperative, association, or similar body.

Depending on context, possible English translations include:

• the business manager
• the managing agent
• the administrator

There is not always one perfect English equivalent, because the exact role depends on the type of organization. In this sentence, it refers to the person responsible for updating the bylaws after approval.

These are definite endings in Norwegian.

In this sentence:

• vedtektsendringen = the amendment
• forretningsføreren = the administrator / business manager
• vedtektene = the bylaws

Norwegian often adds the equivalent of the to the end of the noun instead of using a separate word.

A quick overview:

• en vedtektsendring = an amendment

• vedtektsendringen = the amendment

• en forretningsfører = a business manager / administrator

• forretningsføreren = the business manager / administrator

• vedtekter = bylaws
• vedtektene = the bylaws

So those endings are doing the job that the often does in English.

Yes. Norwegian uses compound words very freely.

vedtektsendringen is built from:

• vedtekt = bylaw / statute / article
• endring = change / amendment

Together:

• vedtektsendring = amendment to the bylaws

Then the definite ending -en is added:

• vedtektsendringen = the bylaw amendment / the amendment to the bylaws

Notice the -s- in the middle: vedtekts-. That linking s is very common in Norwegian compounds.

Yes. A very natural alternative is:

• Hvis vedtektsendringen blir godkjent, oppdaterer forretningsføreren vedtektene.

This means almost the same thing.

The difference is mainly tone:

• hvis = ordinary, common if
• gitt at = more formal, more like provided that or given that

So if you are writing formal administrative Norwegian, gitt at fits well. In everyday language, hvis is often more common.

Yes, it is standard to use a comma after an initial subordinate clause like this.

So:

• Gitt at vedtektsendringen blir godkjent, oppdaterer forretningsføreren vedtektene.

The comma helps separate the condition from the main clause.

This is especially common and useful when the first part is longer or more formal.

Yes, that is possible:

• Gitt at vedtektsendringen godkjennes, oppdaterer forretningsføreren vedtektene.

This uses the s-passive instead of the bli-passive.

Both are grammatical, but they can differ a little in style:

• blir godkjent often sounds a bit more neutral and common in many contexts
• godkjennes can sound slightly more formal or written

In administrative or legal language, both are quite possible. For many learners, blir + past participle is often easier to recognize at first.

Norwegian does not need a separate word like then here.

English often allows:

• If the amendment is approved, the administrator then updates the bylaws.

But Norwegian can simply say:

• Gitt at vedtektsendringen blir godkjent, oppdaterer forretningsføreren vedtektene.

The conditional relationship is already clear from Gitt at. If you wanted, you could add a time word in some contexts, but it is not necessary. The meaning is already complete without it.