高校硕士研究生专业英语精品教材
高级法学英语
中南财经政法大学研究生部精品教材研究课题（2012—2014）
编写说明
《高级法学英语》旨在培养学习者借助已有的基础英语为工具学习法学知识，在法学知识的学习过程中，习得专业语言。编写原则既遵循语言学习的内在规律性，又充分体现法学知识的专业特点，重在提高法学硕士研究生的专业英语思辨能力。
课文取材不再是一般法学知识的简要陈述，而是以问题研究为导向的深入探讨。语料源于英美学者2012年以来发表的论文或出版的著作。
全书共十个单元。单元课文阅读量为5000英文单词。每单元由课文、生词、注解、练习和法律英语汉译技巧组成。单元课文是由三篇各1500字左右的文章组成一个内容完整、主题突出的统一体，以有利于学习者贯通知识，进一步深入分析探讨。课文内容包括普通法系与大陆法系的比较、合同与准合同、商人法与商法、欧洲统一销售法、国际环境法、公平招聘法律问题、跨国离婚法律问题、有子女的父母犯罪量刑问题、英格兰与苏格兰刑事拘留问题、美国法学教育与改革等专题。法学英语翻译技巧包括基本翻译技巧----加注、增补、省略、转换、切分、合并，以及句子翻译技巧----名词从句的翻译、状语从句的翻译、定语从句的翻译和长句的翻译。单元练习包括阅读理解问题、词汇练习、短文翻译和课文概要写作。
本教程设计阅读总量为50000英文单词，生词概率为2%，适合大学英语四级水平以上且有相当法学基础的学习者使用。
CONTENTS
UNIT ONE CONTRACT LAW
Section A Understanding of Contract
Section B Mistake in Contract
Section C Quasi-Contract
Section D Translation Skill: Annotation
UNIT TWO LITIGATING MARITAL PROPERTY AND SUPPORT RIGHTS FOR INTERNATIONAL DIVORCE
Section A Jurisdiction and Procedure in International Divorce Litigation
Section B Defining Property and support rights
Section C Recognizing and Enforcing Marital Property and Support Orders
Section D Translation Skill: Amplification
UNIT THREE A FAMILY LAW PERSPECTIVE ON PARENTAL INCARCERATION
Section A Family Law and Child Development
Section B Approaches to Consideration of Children’s Interests
Section C Proposal for Consideration of Children’s Interests When Sentencing Parents Section D Translation Skill: Omission
UNIT FOUR FAIRNESS AND INEQUALIT IN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION LITIGATION Section A How People Assess Legal Fairness: Toward an Analysis of Situated Justice Section B Employment Civil Rights
Section C Toward Understanding Situated Justice
Section D Translation Skill: Shift of Perspective
UNIT FIVE LAW MERCHANT
Section A Foundations of the Law Merchant
Section B The Law in Law Merchant
Section C Twenty-first-century Law Merchant
Section D Translation Skill: Division
UNIT SIX COMMOM EUROPEAN SALES LAW
Section A The Substantive Scope of the CESL
Section B Possible Routes for Members to Reach the Agreement
Section C Further Questions from the Proposal within the Framework
Section D Translation Skill: Combination
UNIT SEVEN A NEW DAWN FOR SCOTTISH CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Section A Arrest, Custody and Police Powers
Section B Access to Legal Assistance
Section C Requirement for Corroboration
Section D Translation Skill: Translation of Noun Clause
UNIT EIGHT INTERNATIONAL LAW OF ENVIROMENTAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENT AND THE ESPOO CONVENTION
Section A The Obligation to EIA
Section B Content of an EIA
Section C Challenging an EIA: Judicial Review
Section D Translation Skill: Translation of Adverbial Clause
UNIT NINE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE COMMON LAW: THE PUZZLE OF MIXED LEGAL FAMILIES Section A The history of the common law
Section B Mixed Jurisdictions and Mixed Legal Families
Section C THE Economic Model
Section D Translation Skill: Translation of Attributive Clause
UNIT TEN AMERICAN LAW SCHOOL EDUCATION
Section A History of Legal Education
Section B Law School Rankings
Section C Law School Education Reform
Section D Translation Skill: Translation of Long Clause
Appendix Key to the Exercise
UNIT ONE
CONTRACT LAW
Section A
Understanding of Contract
1 In the eyes of lawyers the word ―contract‖ is used in common speech, simply to refer to a writing containing terms on which the parties have agreed. ―Contract‖ is often used in a more technical sense to mean a promise, or a set of promises, that the law will enforce or at least recognize in some way. British law defines contract as an agreement arising from offer and acceptance. One party makes an offer, and another party accepts that offer. When this has happened (provided that other necessary factors, namely, consideration and intention to contract, are present) there is a contract.
2 In arguing the definition of contract some jurisprudents think neither promise nor agreement is completely satisfactory as a basis for the definition. They claim that the definition of the American Restatement ignores the bargain—the exchange of equivalents which is the essence of a contract. No indication is made in the definition that the typical contract is a two-sided affair, something being promised or done on one side in return for something being promised or done on the other side. Thus to say that a contract can simply be ―a promise‖ is to overlook the fact that there is ge nerally some act or promise given in return for the other promise before that promise becomes a contract. Even to say that a contract may consist of ―a set of promises‖ gives no indication that some of these promises are usually given in return for some
others. But it would be wrong to assume that all contracts are genuine bargains in which something is offered on one side for something else of equivalent value on the other.
3 Every promise is an agreement and every set of promises forming the consideration for each other is also an agreement. Agreement implies two or more persons who agree upon the same thing in the same sense. It may create legal obligation or it may not create legal obligation and in this sense not every agreement can become enforceable at law.
4 These scholars also argue that all the definitions in terms of promises or agreements presuppose that people only enter into contractual relations after they have made some agreement or promise. In fact, this is not always the case. People sometimes simply enter into transactions or relations which are not really based on prior agreements or promises. One obvious example is that of the simultaneous exchange, or sale. A person who buys goods in a supermarket and pays cash for them is exchanging his money for the goods that he buys.
5 There is no doubt at all that this is a legal contract, but it is artificial to regard it as a contract created by agreement or promise. To insist that there must be a prior agreement or a set of promises in such a case is to imply that there is a moment of time—before the handing over of the goods and the money—in which the parties are legally bound to perform their agreement or promises. But it seems very doubtful whether that is the case. Still it must be recognized that it might be very well argued that ―in contemplation of law‖ there is an implied agreement before the actual exchange of goods for money.
6 Promises and agreements undoubtedly lie close to the center of the concept of contract, but there are at least two other ideas which also lie very close to that center. One is that a person who induces another to rely upon him and change his position, ought not to let that person down, and the other is that a person who does a service to another or renders him some benefit, ought generally to be recompensed for his trouble. Contractual obligations are often imposed for one or other of these reasons on persons who have not really promised or agreed to bear them. In order to reconcile
this result with traditional definitions of contract, two devices are often employed. One is to rely on the concept of an ―implied agreement‖ or ―implied promise‖；the other is to argue that the liability being imposed is not ―truly‖ contractual but is in fact
a legal liability of a different kind，for instance，a liability in tort.
7 In practice, people can gather some idea of what the word ―contract‖ means fro m the cases in Bolin Farms v. American Cotton Shippers Ass‘n (1973). That year saw a spectacular rise in the price of cotton on the American market. The causes were said to include large shipments to China, high water and flood conditions in the cotton belt, late plantings forced by heavy rains, and the devaluation of the dollar. In the early months of the year, before planting, a cotton farmer will make a ―forward‖ sale contract for delivery to the buyer of all cotton to be raised and harvested on a specified tract at a fixed price per pound, without guarantee of quantity or quality. The farmer can then use this contract to finance the raising of his crop.
8 Early in 1973, cotton farmers made such contracts to sell at a price roughly equal to the price on the market at that time, some 30 cents a pound. By the time the cotton had been raised and was ready for delivery, however, the market price had risen to about 80 cents a pound. Many refused to perform the ―forward‖ contracts that they had made at the lower price, and scores of lawsuits resulted throughout the cotton belt. Not only were the farmers universally unsuccessful, but the decisions evoked little attention.
9 What promises will the law enforce? What remedies were available to the disappoint ed cotton buyers on the farmers‘ enforceable promises?The cases here expose three fundamental assumptions made by courts in enforcing promises. One of these is that ―law is concerned mainly with relief of promisees to redress breach and not with punishment of promisors to compel performance.‖ A second assumption is that the relief granted to the aggrieved promisee should generally protect the promisee‘s expectation by attempting to put the promisee in the position in which it would have been had the promise been performed. A third assumption is that the appropriate form of relief is substitutional, in the form of a judgment awarding money damages to be paid to the aggrieved promisee, rather than specific, in the form of a
court order directing the promisor to perform its promise.
10 After the above discussion we come to know the ―Contract‖ may be defined as an agreement, a promise or a set of promises, which create legal liabilities rather than moral obligations, enforceable by the law between two or more persons to do or forebear from doing some act or acts；their intentions being to create legal relations and not merely to exchange mutual promises, both having given something, or having promised to give something of value as consideration for any benefit derived from the agreement or the promise except a transaction agreement by deed. Although transactions by deed are legally binding they are not true contracts at all. A transaction by deed derives its legally binding quality from the special way in which it is made rather than from the operation of the contract law.
11 The definition of contract in the Chinese contract law stresses its functions, saying that a contract is the manifestation of intention to establish, change or terminate the civil relationship between two or more parties. Lawfully established contract shall be protected by law. According to this definition a contract is of three features：
(1) Making a contract is a civil juristic act done by both sides. At least two parties shall enter, and express their genuine intention. Otherwise a contract cannot be established.
(2) The purpose to make a contract is to bring out a certain civil juristic effect, including establishing, changing or terminating the civil relationship between the two parties.
(3) Making a contract is a legal act rather than illegal act. Unlawfully established contracts are null or void.
12 In some continental countries, for example, in Germany, the BGB uses an abstract concept of Rechtegcsehaft, putting contract into a category of legal act which covers intention of the two parties and some other certain lawful conducts. This intention is viewed as an essential requirement to form a contract, therefore, the two parties can not establish a contract if they do not manifest it to each other. In the French Civil Code there is a more specific concept of Consensus than that of legal act.
Consensus here means the genuine intention of the two parties. Without manifestation of the intention a contract cannot be concluded.(1488words)
New Words and Proper Terms
offer n. 邀约，发价
acceptance n. 接受，承诺
devaluation n. 货币贬值
court order 法庭判令
consideration n. 对价，约因
forbearance n. 克制，抑制
constitute v. 构成
recompense vt. 赔偿；酬谢
Rechtsgeschaefte （德语）法律行为，合法交易
consensus n. 合意
equivalent value 对等的价值
simultaneous exchange 同时发生的交易
contemplation of law 法律意图
forward contract 期货合同
Notes
1. law is concerned mainly with relief of promises to redress breach and not with punishment of promisors to compel performance. 法律主要关注的是为了纠正允诺人违约的行为而对受允诺人所给予的司法救济，而不是强制承诺人履约而实施的处罚。
2. Contract与Agreement的区别
合同的成立必须具备几个主要因素。它们（要约和承诺构成的）协议、约因、
设立法律关系的愿望和缔约能力四大部分组成。但―协议‖这一术语含义更广，例如协议可能缺乏合同的必备条款（essential clauses/provisions）。
上述解释说明，contract(合同)和agreement(协议)的概念虽然接近，但使用范围不同，不能互换使用。合同是协议的重要组成部分，所有合同一定是协议，而协议不一定都是合同。可以说具备合同成立要求的具有强制执行力的协议才是合同。
3. BGB是Burgerliches Geselzbuch《德国民法典》的简称。《德国民法典》是德意志帝国1896年8月18日公布并自1900年1月1日施行的一部民法典，它是继1804年《法国民法典》（《拿破仑法典》）之后，资本主义国家又一部重要的民法典。这部法典公布至今已有一百余年，已经过多次修订，有时甚至是重大的修订，包括条文的废止和增添，但它的基本结构、基本内容和条文顺序的编排都没有发生改变。至今它仍是德国民法最重要的基础和最重要的渊源。
4.Bolin Farms v. American Cotton Shippers Ass‘n (1973). 柏林农场诉美国棉花运输联盟案。Association 的缩写形式可为assn., ass'n., Assn.
Exercises
I. Questions for discussion:
1. Can a promise or an agreement constitute a contract?
2. ―Neither agreement nor promise is complete ly satisfactory as a basis for the definition of contract.‖ Do you agree with it?
3. What elements does contract possess?
4. Explain ―every contract is an agreement but every agreement is not a contract‖.
5. What is the BGB?
II. Choose the best answer for each of the following according to the text:
1．A legal contract may be defined as___________.
A. an agreement
B. a promise
C. a set of promises
D. the consent
2. In the case of Bolin Farms v. American Cotton Shippers Ass‘n (1973), the court decision of enforcement was based on _____ fundamental assumptions
A. one
B. two
C. three
D. four
3. In the French Civil Code, the Consensus means the genuine intention of the _____parties.
A. one
B. two
C. three
D. four
4. A person who buys goods in a supermarket and pays cash for them is exchanging his money for the goods that he buys, which is taken as a legal________.
A. contract
B. agreement
C. promise
D. action
5. The BGB is of________ legal system.
A. common law
B. continental law
C. civil law
D. case law
III. Fill in the following blanks with the given words:
Indivisible contract, divisible contract, competent party, consideration, delayed payment, express contract, formal contract, oral contract, written contract, illegal contract, implied contract, legality of purpose, mutual agreement.
1. A person who is of legal age and normal mentality is________.
2. The rights and obligations of the parties to a contract should be________.
3. A contract that is created entirely through conversation of the parties involved is _____.
4. The promises exchanged by parties to a contract is_______.
5. A contract that is understood from the acts or conduct of the party is__________.
6. A contract whose meaning is not determined by the conduct of the parties is_____.
7. A written contract that bears a seal is_________.
8. A ___________with several unrelated parts, and each of them can stand alone.
9. The _________is that a contract cannot violate the law.
10. The_________ is that the related parts depend on one another for satisfactory performance.
IV. Translate the following into Chinese:
Making a contract is a civil juristic act done by both sides. At least two parties shall enter, and express their genuine intention. Otherwise a contract cannot be
established. The purpose to make a contract is to bring out a certain civil juristic effect, including establishing, changing or terminating the civil relationship between the two parties. Making a contract is a legal act rather than illegal act. Unlawfully established contracts are null or void. Contractual obligations are often imposed on all parties. According to the difference among their appearance, it falls into precontractual obligation after contractual obligation and the subordinated obligation in contract performing.
Section B
Mistake in Contract Law
1 Generally, a valid contract must be based on real mutual assent. A valid contract must be an agreement reached through consultation. A contract may be vitiated on the ground of existence of mistake, misrepresentation, duress and undue influence.
2 Mistake refers to misunderstanding of one or both parties as to determination of the subject matter, its existence, its quality, the nature of a contract, the identity of the contracting party, or the terms, etc. For example, S delivers an offer to the T (Telegraph) Company to transmit to B which states：―will sell 800 000 laths delivered at your address, two ten net cash.‖ Through fault of the T Company, the message is transmitted as an offer to sell for ―two net cash‖ B accepts without knowing and without having reason to know of the mistake. On the rationale, there may be no enforceable contract between S and B. However, by the better view, B has an enforceable contract at ―two net cash‖. This case indicates that the offeror assumes the risk of a mistake, having chosen his means of transmission. (S may have a cause of action for damages against the T Company depending upon the contract between
those parties and applicable regulatory enactment.)
3 Mistake must be of fact and not of law. This concept has a technical meaning and does not cover errors of judgment as to value. Thus if A buys an article thinking it is worth ￡100 when in fact it is worth ￡50 only, the contract is good. And A must bear loss if there has been no misrepresentation by the seller. This is what is meant by the maxim caveat emptor (let the buyer beware.)
4 An interesting example of how the judiciary can interpret what some might think to be mistakes of law as mistakes of fact in provided by Solle v. Butcher. In that case Butcher had agreed to lease a flat in Beckenham to Solle at a yearly rental of ￡250, the lease to run for seven years. Both parties had acted on the assumption that the flat, which had been substantially reconstructed, so as to be virtually a new flat, was no longer controlled by the Rent Restriction legislation then in force. If it were so controlled the maximum rent payable would be ￡140 per annum. Nevertheless Butcher would have been entitled to increase that rent by charging 8% of the cost of repairs and improvements which would bring the figure up to about ￡250 per annum, the rent actually charged, if he had served a statutory notice on Solle before the new lease was executed. No such notice was in fact served. Actually they both for a time mistakenly thought that the flat was decontrolled when this was not the case. Solle realized the mistake after some two years, and sought to recover the rent he had overpaid and to continue for the balance of the seven years as a statutory tenant at ￡140 per annum. Butcher counterclaimed for rescission of the lease in equity.
5 Held: the mistake was one of fact and not of law. The fact that the flat was not within the provisions of the Rent Acts, and this was a bilateral mistake as to quality which would not invalidate the contract at common law. However, on the counterclaim for rescission, it was held that the lease could be rescinded. In order not to dispossess Solle, the court offered him the following alternatives (a) to surrender the lease entirely；or (b) to remain on possession as a mere licensee until a new lease could be drawn up after Butcher had had time to serve the statutory notice which would allow him to add a sum for repairs to the ￡140 which would bring the lawful rent up to ￡250 per annum.
6 In practice, such mistakes may come into three categories：mutual (or non-identical bilateral) mistake, common (or bilateral identical) mistake and unilateral mistake.
7 Mutual (or non-identical bilateral) mistake occurs where X offers to sell car A and Y agrees to buy, thinking X is B, in other words, when concluding a contract both parties do not intend the same meaning. In this case, neither should be bound. In Raffles v. Wichelhaus (1864) S agreed to sell cotton to B to arrive on the Peerless. There happened to be two ships named Peerless, one to sail in October, the other to sail in December. The seller tendered the cotton from the December Peerless. The buyer intended to buy cotton from the October Peerless. Therefore it was held that there existed no contract between the parties. At common law the contract made in such a mistake is not necessarily void because the court will try to find the sense of promise. This usually occurs where, although the parties are at cross-purposes, the contract actually identifies the agreement. On the other hand, equity also tries to find the sense of the promise as identified by the contract, thus following the law. However, equitable remedies are discretionary and even where the sense of the promise as identified by the contract can be ascertained equity will not necessarily grant specific performance if it would cause hardship to the defendant.
8 Common (or bilateral identical) mistake occurs where both parties are mistaken and each makes the same mistake. In practice only common mistake as to the existence of the subject matter of the contract or where the subject matter of the contract already belongs to the buyer will make the contract void at common law. S and B had concluded a purchase and sale contract as to a shipload of maize. They had thought that the maize was on the ship. But in fact, the captain had executed his power to sell out the maize because the maize had begun to rot away. In this case both parties were not bound because of non-existence of the maize. This can be also illustrated in Galloway v. Galloway (1914). A man and woman entered into a separation deed, believing that they were husband and wife. This was not so, because the prior spouse of the husband turned out to be still alive. The separation deed was held to be void, because the marriage, which was the basis of the deed, did not exist.
9 Unilateral mistake. If one of the parties should not have known or did not know of the quality, the main part or the nature of the contract and the other party knew, there is a contract according to the former‘s misunderstanding. In this situation the former cannot repudiate the contract unless he can prove in evidence that he has been intentionally deceived and induced to enter into the contract he did not intend to. Consider the situation：If an offeror misdirects his offer to the person, the latter cannot accept the offer if he knows or has reason to know that he was not the intended offeree. However, if the offeree neither knows nor has reason to know of the misdirection of the offer the unintended offeree may accept and create an enforceable contract.
10 The validity of a contract is usually not affected by mistake unless the mistake is fundamental and harmful to the contract. In practice, the following mistakes result in a valid contract. (a) A mistake in intention made by one party, for example, a mistake made in calculation of price. (b) A mistake in judgment, for example, a mistake in estimate of one‘s ability to perform a contract. (c) A mistake in understanding the meaning of a description of certain products in sale of them.
11 In the light of civil law there are two kinds of mistakes shall vitiate a contract.
(a) A mistake in the quality of a subject matter (this quality seen as a substantial one without which the buyer would not have bought). (b) A mistake in identity of the other counter-party which is vital to the conclusion of a contract.
12 It is held in the GBG that a contract shall be rescinded by (a) a mistake in manifestation of the intention and (b) a mistake in form of manifestation of the intention. (1373 words)
New Words and Proper Terms
caveat emptor n. 买方自慎; 货物售出，概不退还
Peerless n. 无敌号货轮
in evidence 举证
arbitration agency 仲裁机构
reality n. 真实性
consultation n. 协商
identity n. 身份
annum n. 一年
decontrol v. 解除对……管制
vitiate v. 使……无效
dispossess v. 剥夺
Notes
1. Mistake must be of fact and not of law.
错误可以是事实错误（mistake of facts），即与交易的实际情况不相符合的错误；也可以是法律错误（mistake of law），即合同适用法律方面的错误。单方错误与双方错误。
Mistake of Law: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" is a common saying. If a person does not know that the legislature has passed a law criminalizing something or that a person does know what is against the law, i.e., does not know what the law forbids, that this ignorance does not operate to relieve the person of criminal responsibility for the commission of the crime. At common law, mistake of law or "ignorance of the law" was no defense.
Mistake of Fact: There, it is required that the defendant must have acted or omitted to have acted under an actual and reasonable belief in the existence of the facts. Those facts or circumstances, if true, must have made the defendant's conduct lawful. The defendant's belief must not only be actual (honest) but also a reasonable belief.
Exercises
I. Write T (true) or F (false) for each statement of the following according to what you have learnt from the text:
1. A contract must be an agreement reached through consultation.
2. Mistake must be of fact and not of law.
3. Mistakes may be in three categories：mutual mistake, common mistake and unilateral mistake.
4. A contract shall be rescinded by a mistake in manifestation of the intention and a mistake in form of manifestation of the intention.
5. The validity of a contract is usually affected by mistake unless the mistake is fundamental and harmful to the contract.
6. Bilateral identical mistake occurs where both parties are mistaken and each makes the same mistake.
7. Non-identical bilateral mistake occurs where X offers to sell car A and Y agrees to buy, thinking A is B.
8. If A buys an article thinking it is worth ￡100 when in fact it is worth ￡50 only, the
contract is illegal
9. In common law the contract made in such a mistake is not necessarily void because the court will try to find the sense of agreement.
10. In the light of civil law there are many kinds of mistakes shall vitiate a contract. II. Translate the following into Chinese :
The system of mistake is an old system of civil law, and the expression of intention mistake is different from the concept of mistake in Anglo-American law.
The validity of a contract is usually not affected by mistake unless the mistake is fundamental and harmful to the contract. In practice, the following mistakes result in a valid contract. (a) A mistake in intention made by one party, for example, a mistake made in calculation of price. (b) A mistake in judgment, for example, a mistake in estimate of one‘s ability to perform a contract. (c) A mistake in understanding the meaning of a description of certain products in sale of them.
In the light of civil law there are two kinds of mistakes shall vitiate a contract. (a) A mistake in the quality of a subject matter. (b) A mistake in identity of the other counter-party which is vital to the conclusion of a contract.
Section C
Quasi-Contract
1 The term ?quasi-contract‘, once used to describe the area of law now called ?restitution‘ or ?unjust enrichment‘, is now out of favour. ?Quasi-contract‘ says o nly that the matter is not contract. So far as it suggests that there is a sort of contract, it deceives, unintelligibly. Quasi-contractual liability should be understood not as part of unjust enrichment, but as a different basis of liability that can help us see what liability for unjust enrichment might be: liability grounded in notions of fairness.
2 The notion of quasi-contract can help us understand what is at stake. whether to impose liability in certain circumstances in which no contract has been made between the parties but when we have good reason to believe that such a contract would have been made if the parties had had the opportunity to do so. This analysis is more fitting for these cases because by trying to find what the parties would have contracted for, it adopts an ex ante perspective. Interestingly, once again we see that commentators who reject the quasi-contractual analysis end up explaining the situation by invoking contractual concepts. For example, in explaining why liability shoul d be imposed only on successful attempts, Burrows writes: ?A reasonable man would surely pay for someone to try to rescue his drowning daughter or to try to save his burning house‘. Burrows comes close to stating the quasi-contractual rationale for imposing liability: the reason why liability should be imposed in such cases is because people would have been willing to pay for the service (even without the guarantee of success), if they had had the opportunity to do so.
3 Within a quasi-contractual analysis it is not difficult to explain why liability need not be limited to successful attempts. In many contracts for service, the service provider does not promise a certain result, only a certain degree of effort. If the promisor fulfils her contractual liability by performing to that level, she does not breach her contractual obligation even if the service she provides does not match a
certain desired outcome. By contrast, in principle, if the promisor fails to perform to the same degree required by the contract, she breaches the contract even if the non-contracted yet desired outcome is achieved.
4 A true emergency situation that should give rise to quasi-contractual liability exists in the following situation: an uncontracted-for service is provided when (a) transaction costs for the contract are prohibitively high; (b) had the service not been provided, the recipient of the service would have suffered a considerable real loss; (c) the recipient has not provided evidence to suggest that she would have declined the service if she had had the opportunity to do so; and (d) the service provided was of adequate quality. If these conditions obtain and someone provides an unconsented service to another, the provider of the service is entitled to recover from the person she assisted, whether or not her service was successful.
5 The four conditions highlight the quasi-contractual aspect of this sort of liability, both by limiting liability to those situations in which contracts were not made only because of high transaction costs, and by their focus on the ex ante perspective. As with all cases of comparing reality to a hypothetical case, this approach raises a question as to which hypothetical situation we envisage and how different we make it from what actually took place: do we imagine the recipient in perfect health making a contract with the person who provided him with the service, or do we change the facts as little as possible from how things actually were and imagine the recipient consenting to a contract with the service provider in the last moments before losing consciousness? The latter situation may seem the better one because it is ?closer‘ to how things were.
6 However, this case is problematic from a contractual perspective: it is hard to know what a market price for such a case would be, partly because there are not enough such cases to establish a market price. Further, in such cases it would be rational for the recipient to agree to pay anything for a treatment, down to the level of subsistence below which he would rather not stay alive, and because at this moment the particular service provider is a monopolist, it is possible that she will demand such a price. This implies that in such cases the recipient's willingness to pay would be
strongly affected by his ability to pay, which differs considerably among people. More broadly, the latter scenario is one in which one's autonomy is compromised. As quasi-contract liability is supposed to be grounded in the same notions of autonomy that ground contractual liability. It is also the hypothetical that matches the liability rule proposed.
7 Another aspect of the proposal worth highlighting is that it does not try to identify emergency cases directly. Rather, it assumes that emergency cases are cases of ?considerable loss‘ (and not merely cases of foregone opportunity to make a profit) and limits recovery to them. The basis for this definition is psychological: even though from an economic perspective a lost profit is (more or less) similar to an actual loss of similar size, people tend to react very differently to actual losses and foregone benefits. The second and third conditions provide additional indirect guarantee that only true cases of emergency are captured in the definition. The claimant in such a case would have to show that transaction costs were high, or else her quasi-contractual claim would fail for not taking the contractual route when it was readily available. The third condition not only provides an easy way for the service recipient to avoid liability, but also helps identify rescue cases on the assumption that in other cases the recipient would have rejected the service.
8 Another advantage of the suggested solution over that of free acceptance is that in cases that do not fall under it, the recipient will not have to reject the service because the provider will not be able to establish the first condition. Birks's solution requires the recipient of the service to actively reject the service or otherwise risk having to pay for it. Because the proposed alternative is more finely tailored to identify those instances in which liability should be imposed, in all non-emergency situations the recipient of a service will not have to do anything to avoid liability for unconsented services.
9 The defendant's liability under quasi-contract is equal to the value of the benefit conferred by the plaintiff. The value is the fair market value of the benefit and not necessarily the subjective value that the defendant enjoys. A traditional measure of the fair market value is called quantum meruit, for "as much as is deserved." For
法律英语学习的层次与材料简介来源：胡敏的日志 接触法律方面的英语已数年，从漫无目的信手乱翻，到上法律英语课，再到上英语的法律课程，到现在的用英语进行法律方面的工作，走了很多弯路，也积攒了点滴经验体会。看版面上相关的讨论，觉得还可以更体系化，总结几点，和各位切磋。 学习法律英语，不能仅以会读、会写几个词汇就觉得万事大吉，要清楚自己的目标、学习的层次，循序渐进，渐次登堂入室。根据不同的层次，大致可分一下几个类型： 1. 入门搭框型：了解法律英语的基本词汇、语用同时西方法律、司法基本体系构架，即Mr.何家弘的“一石二鸟”。 可以学习下何家弘的《法律英语》（法律出版社，2003 第二版，好像已有配套翻译）。这种书要精读。试着自己动手翻译一遍，事半功倍。基础好同学可以接着读一点，英国人或美国人专门给外国人学法律英语的书，如《English Law and Language》(Cassell 出版)。 2. 专业型拓展型：拓展下自己的专业或者自己喜欢的领域。建议通读一本相关领域的简明教材，例如blackstone,nutshell系列的都不错的。另外，以熟悉的领域为核心，是提高英语的水平的有效捷径。 3. 比较参考型：即研究某个课题外国是否有相同的法律规定、案例规则等。学会泛读，把握主旨。以精读课的方式来读，反而会让自己陷入生词、查词旋涡。类似方面的，可以读一些案例。例如：https://https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d14535986.html,数据库大学校园网通常能已经由学校付费，学生可以免费使用。 （附：《https://www.doczj.com/doc/2d14535986.html,数据库》是面向法律专业人员设计的，拥有11400多个数据资料库以及31500多项资料来源，特别是在法律事务方面，是收录最全的法律资源库之一。包含了LexisNexis中全部法律内容，也包含了商业、金融、政治、时事等方面的内容，主要是全球范围内（如英国、加拿大、澳大利亚、新加坡、马来西亚、中国内地、香港等）法律案例、法律法规条文、国家法、国际条约和协议、知识产权等，使用的对象为律师、大学法学院、法律咨询公司、司法官员等。） 4. 日常应用型：即与法律有关的日常业务中，处理涉外信函。注意学习一些商务信函的知识和相关领域的常用词汇、句型、格式。推荐《国际商务写作教程》（王素清，对外经贸大学出版社）。日常应用的专业词汇、句型跟法律英语教材、案例书籍、法条等的具有很大差别，这是新手一定要注意的。多阅读些此前的卷宗，虚心学习，不怕修改，三几个月就能顺手了。 5. 专业应用型：即出具外语法律文书、法律建议，如合同等。最保险的还是找一些类似的格式文书照搬过来，格式文书在网上能够搜索的到，或者参考此前业务成文。 6. 翻译通才型：即从事涉及法律内容的材料翻译。多读、多练、功夫在诗外。中英文方面的法律书都通读些，一些基本的简明教程即可。另外，还应当以法律为中心，多关注关联的知识
?法律英语典型句型的翻译 ?1. OTHERWISE ?2. SUBJECT TO ?3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ?4. WHERE ?5. ANY PERSON WHO DOES... SHALL ... ?6. FOR THE PURPOSE(S) OF ... ?7. PROVIDED THAT ... ?8. NOTWITHSTANDING ... ?9. SA VE.../ EXCEPT (FOR)... ?10. IN RESPECT OF… 1.OTHERWISE ?Otherwise 在法律英语中的用法： ?跟unless引导的句子（让步状语从句）连用； ?置放在连词or之后使用； ?与than一起，通常用来否定句子的主语。 例1 OTHERWISE ?In this Ordinance, unless the context otherwise requires, "state" means a territory or group of territories having its own law of nationality. (Laws of Hong Kong, Cap.30, Wills Ordinance, Art. 2) ?在本条例中﹐除文意另有所指外, “国家”指拥有本身国籍法的领域或一组领域。 例2 OTHERWISE ? A notice under subjection (1) shall, unless it otherwise provides, apply to the income from any property specified therein as it applies to the property itself. ?根据第（1）款发出的通知书﹐除其中另有订定外﹐亦适用于通知书内指明的财产的收入﹐一如适用于该项财产本身。 例3 OTHERWISE Any person who by threats, persuasion or otherwise induces a witness or a party not to give evidence in any hearing before the Board commits an offence. ?任何人籍恐吓﹑怂恿或以其它手段诱使证人或一方当事人不在仲裁处聆讯中作证﹐即属犯罪。 例4 OTHERWISE ?If 2 or more persons are defendants to a claim, as partners or otherwise, a process may be served on any of them and an award may be obtained and execution issued against any person so served
法律英语翻译技巧（二）法学语言与法学语言翻译 例1：The law holds that the individual is responsible for his acts. The law also indicates what is good and right, and what may and should be done. It also indicates what is evil and wrong, and should not and may not be done. The law further holds that what is evil and wrong is a crime and may not be done, and if done, renders the doer liable to punishment. The law also recognizes the principle that man has free will and that, with certain exceptions, he exercises free will in commission of any crime that he may commit. 译文1：法律认为公民应对自己的行为负责。法律还规定什么是美好的和正确的，规范了哪些事是允许做或应该做的。同样，法律规范了什么是邪恶的和错误的。法律还进一步明确规定哪些邪恶的错误的事是不能做的犯罪行为看，如果某人做了这样的事，那么该行为就要受到惩罚。同样，法律还承认这样一个原则，每个公民除犯罪自由外都具有自由意志，如果某人在各种违法活动中实施其自由意志，那么他就可能触犯法律。 译文2：法律规定人人应对自己的行为承担责任，分清善良和正义，规范了人们的行为准则；法律还认为，作孽枉法即是犯罪，法不可恕，
法律英语翻译专业词汇 大全 This model paper was revised by LINDA on December 15, 2012.
equality of men and women, equality between [of] the sexes南昌市 Nanchang Municipality南京市 Nanjing Municipality南宁市 Nanning Municipality南平市Nanping Municipality南通市 Nantong Municipality脑外伤综合症 combined external head injuries年报 annual report年度账目 annual accounts宁波市 Ningbo
Municipality宁静的占有权 quiet possession宁夏回族自治区 Ningxia Hui Nationality Autonomous Region扭亏为盈 turn a loss-making enterprise into a profitable one扭曲金融分配 distorted allocation of financial resources纽约公约 New York Convention农村剩余劳动力 surplus rural labour农村信用社 rural credit cooperatives农副产品采购支出 outlays for agricultural procurement农工商联合企业 agro-industrial-commercial combines农垦区 land reclamation district农民集体 peasant collective农药残留物 pesticide residue农业部 Ministry of Agriculture农业发展银行 Agriculture Development Bank农业税agricultural tax农转非 rural residents become urban residents虐待 maltreat虐待罪 crime of abuse挪用公款 misappropriation of public funds殴打他人 assault 偶犯 casual offender排斥外在证据原则 parol evidence rule排除责任条款 exclusion clause排纷解讼 dissolution of disputes and litigation排他性的独占权exclusive monopoly right派生的分租人 derivative under-lessor派生的分租租契derivative under-lease判案理由 adjudicative reasons, grounds of judgment判处sentence判定 confirm判定债务人没有付款的誓章 affidavit of default on the part of the judgment debtor判决 judgment判决理据 grounds of judgment判决书 written judgment判决执行 enforcement of the judgment判刑 sentence泡沫经济bubble economy泡沫效应 bubble effect培育新的经济增长点 to tap new sources of economic growth赔偿 compensate赔偿金 compensation money赔偿损失 compensation for losses赔偿责任 liability to damages配股 allotment of shares, rationed shares配合饲料 compound/mix feed配偶 spouse配偶的父母 parents-in-law配套改革concomitant reforms配套人民币资金 local currency funding of批复 Reply批评教 育 re-education批准 approve, approval批准机关 approval authority批准文号
书名： 1．《合同法》和《公司法》的英文翻译打码QQ群：54493069 2.孙万彪：《英汉法律翻译教程》和《汉英法律翻译教程》 3.《法律翻译-从实践出发》 4.李克兴：《法律翻译理论与实践》 5.陈忠诚：《法窗译话》 入门级： 1、孙万彪的《英汉法律翻译教程》和《汉英法律翻译教程》，涉及的内容都是最基本的，书写得比较严谨，孙老师应该是语言专业出身，对一些词（比如说threatened ）的处理比较好。 2、中文版的《合同法》和《公司法》以及英文版的《合同法》和《公司法》，中文版的不必管哪个出版社的，想来都差不多。英文版的至少有两个版本，我在书店里见过，但现有手头没有，也不方便找。 3、《2000年国际贸易术语解释通则》，有中英文对照版，算是做得比较精致的一本书。这本书不厚，但可以让你明白好的翻译作品应该是什么样的。 4、香港的双语资料库，至少可以利用一下香港联合交易所的双语《上市规则》。香港的词法和句法与大陆有所不同，但值得借鉴。 中级篇： 1、《法律文本与法律翻译》，作者之一是李克兴，他最近还写了一本书，也不错，可以看看。书名记不得了，但如果你在百度搜索栏敲入“李克兴”、“法律翻译”，逐页翻页，应该可以找到。 2、《法律翻译-从实践出发》，这本书有多名作者，既有宏观的论述，又有微观的剖析，作者基本上都是圈内高人。 3、《美国1933年证券法》和《美国1934年证券交易法》，著名的两部美国法律，主译是张路老师，这一系列的书还有，与律所的实战翻译风格比较接近。 4、利用互联网，直接查阅相关法律，如美国的《特拉华州普通公司法》。至于具体查阅哪部法律，看个人的兴趣。每本书后面都有参考书目，可以利用这个作为线索。 高级篇 1、《国际商法教学案例英文选编》，对外经济贸易大学考研用的“灰皮书”，不知现在是不是这样？先读懂这本书，加深对法律知识的了解。 2、《英美商事组织法》，对外经济贸易大学丁丁老师著，同一系列的书还有很多。 3、陈忠诚老师的《词语翻译漫谈》及其续篇、《法窗译话》以及相关的词语翻译书，加强“炼字”功夫。
Legal English (revised version for the students) Ch.1 The Main Features of Legal English 一、法律英语的英译： David Mellinkoff（加州大学洛杉矶分校法学院教授）：《The Language of the Law》1963 1.legal English---Lawful English Legal parlance（说法、用语）/legal lingo（行话、隐语）/legal jargon（行话、黑话）/legalese( 法律八股文)/language of jurisprudence(法理语言) 2. the English Language of the Law or shortened as “the language of the law” 3. 法律英语与法学英语 二、法律英语的范围： 是否凡是涉及法律的英语（词汇、表达方法、句子结构……）都是法律英语？ 英美法学界所公认的法律英语主要是指普通法国家（common-law countries）的法律人所用的习惯语言（customary language），包括某些词汇、短语，或具有特色的一些表达方法(mode of expressions)。 三、法律英语的主要特点： I. precise or exact (准确) 正常情况下，起草法律文件时，用词造句务必十分精准（with great exactness），因为一旦笔者的思想、观点、企图落实成文字，即成为法庭判断是非的重要依据，因为按严格解释原则(principle of strict construction)或唯名论原则(principle of nominalism)，尽管实践中还存在推测意图原则(principle of presumed intent)，但其不占主导地位，书面文字仍然是法官解释法律文件的唯一依据。 实务中鉴于对法律文件中文字的理解不一，也是常有纠纷出现： e.g. The Charter required that directors “shall be elected on a vote of the stockholders representing not less than two-thirds of outstanding capital st ock of the corporation.” 甲方理解成：被选上董事的人需三分之二的股东投票赞成(a candidate to be elected needs the votes of two-thirds of the stockholders ) 乙方则认为：选董事时须有三分之二的股东出席(two-thirds of the stockholders must be present at the meeting at which the election is held) What’s the judge’s opinion? e.g. 一个阿肯色州的美国人临终前写了一个遗嘱，遗嘱写道： The remainder of the testator’s property should be “divided equally between all of our nephews and nieces on my wife’s side and my niece.” 问题出在对“between”一词的理解上。立遗嘱人妻子一边的外甥和外甥女加在一起共有22个。这句话是指立遗嘱人的遗产的一半归其妻子方的22个外甥和外甥女，另一半归其本人一方的外甥女？还是指将遗产在双方的外甥外甥女中平均分配呢？ 为达准确之目的，常使用下列招法： 1. 使用专门术语（下文有述） 2. 重复使用具有绝对含义的词汇，如all , none, perpetuity, never, unavoidable; 3. 使用具有绝对限制含义的短语：
练习1：外国合营者如果有意以落后的技术和设备进行欺骗，造成损失的，应赔偿损失。If the foreign joint venturer causes any losses by deception through the intentional use of backward technology and equipment, it shall pay compensation for the losses. 修改提示：单复数考虑不周；用语不够简洁。 答案（修改要点）：causes any losses →causes any loss(es) 造成一项或多项损失时都应当赔偿，不能仅用复数形式。 pay compensation for the losses →pay compensation therefor (therefor=for that/them) 练习2：人民法院、人民检察院和公安机关办理刑事案件，应当分工负责，互相配合，互相制约，以保证准确有效地执行法律。 原译文：The people’s courts, people’s procuratorates and public s ecurity organs shall, in handling criminal cases, divide their functions, each taking responsibility for its own work, and they shall co-ordinate their efforts and check each other to ensure correct and effective enforcement of law. 修改提示：“分工负责”，应理解为：侧重点在“负责”，而非“分工”，即分工过程中各负其责；respective 比own 更为妥当、准确；原来的译文中，and they shall …比较啰嗦，更严重的问题是，使to ensure …割断了与divide their functions 的联系。 答案（修改要点）：in handling criminal cases, divide their functions, each taking responsibility for its own work, and they shall co-ordinate their efforts and check each other to ensure correct and effective enforcement of law.→… in handling criminal cases, take responsibility for their respective work while dividing functions, co-ordinate, and check each other, to ensure correct and effective enforcement of law. 练习3：商标注册人享有商标专用权，受法律保护。 原译文：Trademark registrants shall enjoy the right to exclusive use of their trademarks and shall be protected by law. 修改提示：商标专用权的译文“貌合神离”，立法原意是“商标专有权”；受法律保护的主语有些歧义，可加括号处理；原文shall滥用，因为并未刻意强调“必须，一定要”。 答案（修改为）：Trademark registrants have the exclusive trademark right, (and are) protected by law. 练习4：被告人的犯罪情节极其严重、社会影响极其恶劣、社会危害极其严重。 原译文：The extremely serious circumstances of the offense committed by the accused have brought abominable influence and severe hazard to the whole society. 修改提示：bring的用法有些生硬，动宾搭配不太适当。 答案（修改为）：have brought abominable influence and severe hazard to the whole society. → have exerted an abominable influence and posed a severe hazard to society. (exert, vt. 施加，产生，如exert pressure on, exert an influence on; abominable, adj. 可恶的，极坏的；pose v. 提出，形成，成为；使摆好姿势pose a problem; pose an obstacle/a threat to …) 练习5：买卖双方同意按下列条款由卖方出售，买方购进下列货物：货号; 品名及规格；数量；单价；总值(数量及总值均有_____%的增减, 由卖方决定)；生产国和制造厂家；包装；唛头；装运期限；装运口岸；目的口岸；保险；
第二课法律、民主与道德分歧 最近人们常听说，在美国及其他的地方，在公开演讲和市民生活中，对手之间的相互尊重和待人接物的礼仪风尚正在减弱。有些人从种种雄辩理念中找到一种指标可能，即重要的是在许多道德分歧问题上“赞同不同意见”。许多这些观念对此类问题存在客观真理。实践共识或者两者都存在的可能性，趋于持怀疑态度。其他人则倾向于把实质性的道德争议完全排除于政治领域之外，以免不可避免要表达的道德上的政治分歧的观念危害到社会的稳定性。然而，在两本有价值的关于道德分歧的政治和法律含义的新书中，则体现了另一种不同的趋势。《民主和意见分歧：政治上难免道德冲突之探源及其对策》，政治理论家艾美?古特曼和丹尼斯?托普逊著；《法律推理和政治冲突》，法律学者卡斯桑斯坦著，提出了对公民生活行为道德分歧内涵的反思，和我们的政体如何处理牢固的道德分歧的具体建议。 1.罗尔斯和理性分歧之事实 曾参加过鸡尾酒会或在大学里教授过伦理学或政治学理论的人，很可能熟悉下列驳论的套路。社会主流不赞同，比如堕胎、色情或者同性恋行为的道德准则。道德分歧的现象表明，这些问题不存在客观真理，只有主观观点。在更大范围内，任何人都没有权利将他自己的主观观点强加于那些恰恰不赞同他们的人身上。因此法律禁止、限制甚至反对堕胎、色情或者同性恋行为的做法不正当的侵犯了人们的自由。 然而稍作反思，人们就会发现这种推理套路中有大量的谬误。也许最受争议的便是它从道德分歧之存在中得出不存在客观道德真理的推论，而这一推论违背了社会常规性。打个比方，如果埃里克斯主张奴隶制是道德性的错误，那么贝尔塔不赞同的现象并不意味着埃里克斯的观点是错误的。实际上，埃里克斯也许对奴隶制的道德性错误想法有误，但贝尔塔不赞同的这一仅有的现象是不构成埃里克斯主张错误的充分理由的。毕竟，贝尔塔的主张也有可能是错误的。如果查尔斯还没有形成自己关于奴隶制的观点，但正希望形成一个正确的观点，那么在得出一个判定之前，他将会把埃里克斯关于奴隶制的道德性的论证和贝尔塔的反证放在一起加以考虑。仅仅从埃里克斯和贝尔塔分歧这一现象中，查尔斯是不可能理性地得出该问题不会有客观真理的结论。此外，如果埃里克斯和贝尔塔的争论从奴隶制转向论证堕胎、同性恋行为、色情、娱乐性使用毒品或其他任何当前有争议的道德问题上，这样的结论依然是不合理的。 但是如果埃里克斯和贝尔塔都是“理性之人”，又该如何呢？如果理性之人对某行为是否不道德发生分歧，是否就意味着该问题不存在客观真理而只有主观观点呢？并非如此。他们的分歧仅表明他们其中之一是错误的，或者他们都是错误的。即便是理性之人也会犯错误，有时也会信息不全。埃里克斯或贝尔塔可能完全或部分的忽视了或者未能充分注意到某些相关的现象或价值。你或他（或者我们大家）都可能正在推理中犯逻辑性的错误或其他的错误。这样或那样的偏见也许或妨碍一个关键的推论或其他的洞悉。 当然，相信客观道德真理的人（像我一样）并非认为那些客观真理总是那么明显，道德问题也从不棘手。相反，某些道德问题特别的棘手。有些道德问题是自身棘手，而有些道德问题的棘手是因为人们所处的文化环境中的物质、偏见、私利或其他因素使相关价值趋于模糊，并妨碍了关键洞察力。理性之人遇见此种情况也难以幸免。然而道德问题的棘手并不是暗示着问题没有正确的答案。即使理性的分歧也并不表明客观真理的缺失。 至此，我一直想表明的是，与人们在鸡尾酒会或大学教室的听闻不同，分歧存在并不意味无客观道德真理——即便是“理性的分歧”，即，有关理性之人自己在多数场合下也可能产生分歧的棘手的道德问题之分歧。但是，有一个不太直接但相当精妙的，从理性之人间道德分歧之事实，论证得出涉及法律和公共政策中充满特定道德问题的、开明结论的方法。约翰?罗尔斯最近的著作中借助于他所谓的“理性多元主义”事实，作为其他问题除外而包含
第十章法律翻译中被动句式的翻译（课堂讲练） 本章教学目标：掌握法律英语翻译中有关被动句翻译的若干基本方法。 课堂讲练： 1、概述 在法律英语句式中，被动语态（PASSIVE VOICE）使用频率很高。通常在以下情况中，法律英语会使用被动语态： 例1、（1）、The Conformity Certificate of the Goods to be delivered shall be delivered directly to Party A by Party C on the Delivery Day of such Goods. 参考译文：拟交付货物的产品合格证应由丙方在该批货物交货日直接交给甲方（或：丙方应在交货日将拟交货物的产品合格证直接交给甲方）。 （2）、When the Goods to be pledged under this Agreement have been delivered to the Dealer acting on behalf of the Pledgee, the Pledgor shall submit to the Dealer a Delivery Note. 参考译文：依照本协议应质押的货物交付给代表质押权人的经销商后，质押人应向经销商提交一份交货单。 （3）、Unless otherwise specified in writing herein, all Confidential Information must be returned to the disclosing Party or destroyed on the expiration of the period of the receiving Party’s using such Confidential Information. 参考译文：除非本协议另有书面规定，所有机密信息在接收方使用期限届满时必须退还给披露方或者销毁。 （4）、如果在合同任何一方向对方发出就因本合同引起的或与之有关的任何争议进行协商的书面请求后15天内，争议仍未得到解决，则任何一方可以将该争议提交中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会仲裁。 参考译文：Where the disputes arising out of or in relation to this Contract can not be resolved within fifteen (15) days after any Party hereto requesting in writing the other Party to commencing a consultation on said disputes, either Party may submit it to the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission for arbitration(CIETAC). （5）、对于任何因违约而给对合同任何一方造成的损失，违约方必须做出金钱赔偿。 参考译文：Any losses suffered by any Party hereto arising from any breach shall be indemnified by the Party in breach. 小结：从上述例句的翻译中可以看出，法律英语使用被动语态，通常是因为（1）、强调动作对象（即受动者），比如例句（1）、（2），此时，往往施动者没有必要说出或不愿说出；或者（2）、施动者本身无法确定，如（3）、（4）；或者两种情形兼而有之，如（5）。在汉译时，由于汉语被动语态的使用频率较英语为少，所以，不必受英语句式限制，将所有被动句都翻译成汉语被动句，译文应以既忠实于原文意义，又符合汉语表达习惯为要旨。 2、英语被动语态基本翻译技巧 1）、译成被动句 如需要强调源语中被动语态的受动对象，一般译成汉语被动句。不过，可以使用”予以、由、受、受到、得以、得到、经“等词汇替代”被“，以表达被动含义。 例2、（1）、If any of the provisions of this Contract is held invalid or unenforceable and unless the invalidity or unenforceability materially violates the fundamental intent and sense of other parts of this Contract, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity and enforceability of any other provisions hereof. 参考译文：如果本合同任何条款被认定为无效或不可执行，除非此无效或不可执行性实质性地违反本合同根本意图或其其他部分意义，则不得影响本合同其他条款的有效性或可执行性。
《当代法律英语》翻译 第四章公法 在所有的民法法系(civil law) 中所做的基础分辨便是公法(public law) 与私法(private law) 的区分。这种分类方法，对于普通法系(common law)而言 仅仅是潜在的或者默示性质的，但对于民法法系而言却是一种基础性的理解方式。一方面，正如我们所了解的一样，这种分类为民法法系国家提供了法庭组织系统的分辨模板。随着公法领域的争端于19世纪可受法院裁判(justiciable) 开始，独立的特别法庭(tribunal) 被建立起来并约束起公法行为。在今天，除了 刑事案件(criminal matters)这一主要例外，普通法院的管辖权(jurisdiction) 依旧限于私法领域的争端。除了这些司法管辖权的推论以外，公法和私法的分别还产生了一种存在于法律专业中的工作(labor)性质的差别。大量的法学教师倾向于证明他们是“公法专家”(publicist) 或者是“私法专家” (privatist)。课 程和论文(treatise) 倾向于公法或私法的其中一个领域，尽管事实上如今已经考虑到的案由(subject matter) 至少更倾向于许多公法方面。 即使在民法法系世界中公法与私法的分别被广泛承认，但这类法系的法学家(lawyer)对其法系划分的理论基础或者法理正当性仍未达成一致，各国对于这种划分方法的范围和效果也未达成一致。然而，一般来说，公法所关注的是国家机 关之间的关系或者国家与公民之间的关系。公法至少包括宪法(con stitutio nal law)，行政法(administrative law)和刑法(criminal law)。而私法是处理公民 或私人团体之间的关系，它至少包括民法(civil law)和商法(commercial law)。这种分类方法的其他几个领域是争论的主题所在。举个例子，民法程序是包含于 一些主体的私人组织的些许法系之中，并且被其他主体认为包含于公法领域。劳动法(labor law)，农业法(agricultural law) ，社会保障(social security) ， 同时也包括大量的现代规则领域，这些法律有些时候被解释为公法与私法领域的混合，有时又被说成自成一类(拉丁文：sui generis)。 即使公法与私法的划分已经扎根于罗马法系(Roman law)中，然而直到当代 与公法相关的领域仍有一种未开发的因素。这便是对于主权(sovereign)的保护， 法理学家(jurist) 总是谨慎的将其放在一边。正如我们注意到的对于民法法系传 统的历史介绍，几乎所有流传下来并被我们所掌握的罗马法律文献都是关注于私法领域，并且大陆法系(continental legal) 科学的传统也是关注于私法领域。 我们观察到的也是如此：在地方主义(localism)和法律多样化的中世纪，公法的研究余地是很小的。但是当集权化(ce ntralize) 的国家以及它的行政机构(administrative organ)开始出现于欧洲大陆的时候 (与逐步产生影响的法律训 练专业化吻合)，这对行政法的发展产生了有利的条件。在19世纪，由于行政法 开始繁荣昌盛，似乎一般的话用于私人个体或者组织的私法规则并不能简单的维持各主体之间的关系，这是因为国家已被政党所垄断。在法国它似乎也是这样的，普通法院(ordinary court) 不能被委托(entrust)从事牵扯到解决国家争端的任 务。正如我们已经了解到的一样：法国对权利分立学说(separation of powers led)的理解，导致其在行政机构中建立起了一系列独立的公法法院。 在德国就是另外一回事了，该国关心被行政权力压迫的普遍性胜过对于司法裁判的不信任。因此，为了避免当公民与行政机构发生争端时是由后者裁决(adjudicate)，德国建立了存在于司法机构中并独立于行政法院的裁判体系。
实用法律英语中英对照版 ——民事 civil ——民事 civil affairs;affairs relating to civil law ——民事上的占有 civil possesion ——民事上的没收 civil forfeiture ——民事上诉 civil appeal ——民事主体 civil subject ——民事法律关系 civil legal relationship ——民事活动 activity relating to civil law ——民事纠纷 civil dispute ——民事客体 civil object ——民事原告 civil plaintiff ——民事被告 civil defendant ——民事指控 civil charge ——民事案件 civil case ——民事过失 civil negligence ——民事责任事故 accident involving civil liability ——民事补偿 civil remedy ——民事诉讼 civil action ——民事损害 civil injury
——民事债务 civil debt ——民事管辖 civil jurisdiction ——民事制裁 civil sanction ——民事审判 civil trial ——民事调解 civil mediation ——民事罚款 civil penalty ——民事权利争议 dispute concerning private rights ——民事权利剥夺 deprived of private rights ——民事权利请求 civil claim ——民事权利变更 alternation of private right ——民政 civil administraion ——民事权利与责任 civil right and liability ——民事权利 civil right ——人身权利 jura personarum; rights of the person ——人格权 right of personality ——上诉权 right of appeal ——不受时效限制权 imprescriptible right ——立遗嘱权 right to make a will ——合法权利 legal right ——共有权 communal tenure
第一课美国法律制度介绍 第一部分特征与特点 美国既是一个非常新的国家也是一个非常老的国家。与许多别的国家相比它是一个新的国家。同时，它还因新人口成分和新州的加入而持续更新，在此意义上，它也是新国家。但是在其它的意义上它是老国家。它是最老的“新”国家——第一个由旧大陆殖民地脱胎而出的国家。它拥有最古老的成文宪法、最古老的持续的联邦体制以及最古老的民族自治实践。 美国的年轻（性）有一个很有意思的特点就是它的历史肇始于印刷机发明之后。因此它的整个历史都得以记录下来：确实可以很有把握地说，任何其它国家都没有像美国这样全面的历史记录，因为像在意大利、法国或者英国过去的传说中湮没的那样的事件在美国都成了有文字记载的历史之一部分。而且其记录不仅全面，还非常浩繁。不仅包括这个国家自1776年以来的殖民时期的记录，还有当前五十个州以及各州和联邦（nation）之间错综复杂的关系网络的历史记录。因此，据一个非常简单的例子，美国最高法院判例汇编有大约350卷，而一些州的判例汇编也几乎有同样多的卷数：想研究美国法律史的读者要面对的是超过5000巨卷的司法案例。 我们不能说一个文件或几个文件就能揭示出一国人民或其政府的特性。但如果横跨一百多年的千百万个文件敲出始终如一的音调，我们就有理由说这就是其主调。当千百万个文件都以同样的方式去解决同样的中心问题，我们就有理由从中得出可以被称为国民特定的确定结论。 第二部分普通法和衡平法 同英国一样，美国法律制度从方法论上来说主要是一种判例法制度。许多私法领域仍然主要是由判例法构成，广泛而不断增长的制定法一直受制于有约束力的（解释制定法的）判例法。因此，判例法方法的知识以及使用判例法的技巧对于理解美国法律和法律方法是极其重要的。 从历史的角度来看，普通法就是由英国皇家法院的巡回法官的判决所得出的普通的一般法——优于地方法。采纳或执行某项诉讼请求是以存在法院令状这种特殊形式的诉为前提的，而这就使最初的普通法表现为由类似于古罗马法的“诉”所构成的体系。如果存在令状（于1227年），诉讼请求就可以被采纳或执行；没有法院令状（为前提）的诉讼请求就没有追索权，因而该诉讼请求也不存在。“牛津条例”（1285年）禁止创设除了“个案令状”之外的新令状，这种“个案令状”使该制度变得较为灵活了，而且导致了后来合同和侵权法的发展。 对于诉的形式的严格限制及由此产生的对追索权的限制导致了衡平法和衡平判例法的发展。“衡平”的一般意义就是寻求“公平”，即公平且善良地裁决，它最初是由国王，后来由作为“国王良知守护人”的大法官颁行，以便在艰难的案件中提供救济。但是到了十四世纪，衡平法和衡平判例法发展成了一个独立的法律制度和与一般的普通法法院一争高下的司法系统（衡平法院）。其规则和格言变得非常固定而且在某种程度上不像在其它法律制度中一样灵活。衡平法的特点有：以特定履行（或实际履行）的方式提供救济（与普通法提供补偿性损害赔偿金的救济方式形成对照）；强制令（为或者不为某项具体行为的临时或者最终法令）；渗透了整个法律制度并且能在许多场合下揭示现代法律概念的起源的所谓的衡平法格言的发展。不过，一般都是只有在普通法救济不充分时，才会出现衡平法救济。比如，优于普通法损害赔偿金被认为是不充分的，这是因为考虑到不动产所具有的唯一性，这些赔偿金无法补偿不动产购买人（的损失），就可能判以特定履行购买不动产。 与普通法一样，衡平法通过司法接纳或通过明确的制定法条款，成了美国法律的一部分。目前，这两个法律制度在许多美国司法管辖区中得以融合（始于1848年的纽约），因而，在这些司法管辖区以及联邦的实践中只存在一种形式的民事诉讼。只有为数很少的州还保留着单独的衡平法院。尽管如此，提及这一历史演变仍然是很重要的，因为它一方面解释了许多当代法律概念（如财产法中的所有权分割）的起源和意义，另一方面，它仍然与做出某些裁决有一定的关联，比如是否有权获得陪审团的审理（这仅发生与普通法的讼案中，在其它案件中仅由法官审理）。另外，这种区别将决定“通常的”普通法赔偿金救济是否适用或者是否可以使用“特别的”衡平法特定履行救济。 “判例法”代表了整个的法官造法体系，而且在现代还包括了普通法和衡平法先例。在不准确的和令人迷惑的用法中，“普通法”和“判例法”这两个术语通常被当作同义词来使用，在这里，“普通法”这个术语一般代表着法官制定的法，以示区别制定法。“判例法”总是代表着法官制定的法律，而“普通法”则相对来说，根据想表达的意思不同，要么代表普通法主题事项（即具体问题）上法官制定的法律，要么在更广范围内指所有法官制定的法律。 第二课法律职业 第一部分律师协会 法律职业的规范主要是各州的事务，每一各州对于执业许可都有其自己的要求。大多数州都要求三年的学业和法律学位。各州自行管理本州申请律师资格的书面考试。不过，几乎所有的州都利用“多州律师资格考试”，这是一种长达一天的多项选择测试，在这项考试之外，各州还会再增加一次主要是关于其本州法律的时长一天的论文考试。大多数申请人都可以通过第一次考试，而且许多失败者都会在下一次考试中通过。每年有四万多人通过这些考试，在经过人品调查之后，他们便可获准在相应的州执业许可。在获得许可之前或之后都不要求实习。到各联邦法院执业的许可规则互不相同，但一般来讲，那些获准在州最高法院执业的律师在办理一些无关紧要的手续之后即可获准在联邦法院执业。 律师执业范围通常仅限于一个地区，因为尽管律师可以代表当事人到其它地区办理事务，但是一个人只能在其获得许可的州内执业。人们习惯雇用本州的律师办理其它洲的事务。但是，只要一个人已经在其获得职业资格的州执业达一定时间（通常是五年），那么他移居到另外一个州时通常无需考试便可获得执业许可。 律师不仅可以从事法律事务，还允许从事任何其他公民能从事的事务。执业律师在企业客户的董事会中工作、从事商业或者积极参与公共事务都是很平常的事情。律师即使在成为法官、政府或者私人企业集团的雇员或者法律教师之后仍然是律师协会的会员，他们可以辞掉这些其它事务，回头开始私人执业。为了在工商业中担任重要的执行职务而放弃执业的律师人数相对较少。这一职业中的流动性和公共责任感的一个例证是哈兰·菲斯克的职业生涯，他曾多次成为一名纽约州律师、一名教授和哥伦比亚法学院院长、美国总检察长和美国最高法院首席大法官。 律师并不按照职责进行正式的划分。在英国对诉讼律师和非诉律师的区分并没有移植到美国，既不存在拥有特别或者专有出庭权的职业群体，也没有专门制作法律文书的职业群体。美国律师的业务范围包括出庭辩护、咨询和起草文书。另外，在被广泛地成为“法律执业”的范围之内，律师的业务范围是专有性的，不对其他人开放。在出庭辩护领域，这种规则非常清楚：任何个人都可以代表其自己出庭，但除了一些基层法院之外，只有律师可以代表他人出庭。不过，律师不得代表他人参与一些行政机关设立的具有司法性质的正式程序当中。在咨询和起草法律文书领域的界限并不是太清晰，比如在在联邦所得税领域的法律执业和会计执业之间就是如此。但是，纽约最高法院的一个裁决表明了大多数美国法院的严格标准，该裁决认为，一个获准在外国执业单位获准在纽约执业的律师不得在纽约对客户提供法律咨询，即使该意见仅限于该律师获准执业的该外国的法律。但是，一个外国律师可能获准在一个州执业，而且无需获得许可便可以以一个外国法律顾问的身份向美国律师提供法律咨询。 1