Mbjkna毕业论文外文翻译资料样例.docx

秋风清，秋月明,落叶聚还散,寒鸦柄复惊。西安建筑科技高校华清学院毕业设计（论文）外文资料翻译院（系）:.经贸系专.业：市场普循姓名：许芳学号I外文出处：DOnaIdHaITiSandDeniS（用外文一uTaHiaContract1.aWTOday.1995附件：1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文完成日期：2010年3月25日1. BrieflyoncontractsThelawofcontractsisconcernedwiththeenforcementofpromissoryobligations.Contractualliabilityisusuallybasedonconsentfreelygivenintheformofanexpresspromiseoroneimpliedinfactfromtheactsoftheparties.Insomecircumstances,however,thecourtswillimplyapromise(oftencalledimpliedinlaworquasicontract)inordertoavoidunjustenrichmentinspiteoflackofconsentbythepartywhoisboundbyit.Thesubjectmatterofcontractlawcomprisescapacity,formalities,offerandacceptance,consideration,fraudandmistake,legality,interpretationandconstuction,perfoimanceandconditionsofperformance,frustrationandimpossibility,discharge,rightsofassigneesandthirdpartybeneficiaries,andremedies.Ithas,Ioaveryconsiderableextent,preserveditsunitaryquality,resistingfundamentaldistinclionsbetweendifferentclassesofcontractsaccordingtoeitherthesubjectoftheagreementorthenatureoftheparties.Accordingly,withsomeexceptions,itsprinciplesareapplicabletoagreementsonsuchvariedsubjectsasemployment,saleol'goodsorland,andinsurance,andtosuchdiversepartiesasindividuals,businessorganizations,andgovernmentalenti1.ies.Itislargelystateratherthanfederallaw,but.itdiffersusuallyonlyindetai1fromonestatetoanther.Whileitisstillprimarilycaselaw,anincreasingnumberofstatutesdealwithparticularproblems.TheUniformCommercialCode,forexample,containssomespecialprovisionsontheformationofcontractsforthesaleofgoods.AndbytheTuckerActof1887,asamended,oneofthemostsignificantofthefederalstatutesinthefield,theUnitedStatesgovernmenthaswaiveditssovereignimmunityincontractactionsbyconsentingtosuitinthefederalcourts.Someruleslaiddownbystatute,andbycaselawaswell,aremandatoryorcompu1soryandcannotbeavoidedbytheparties,whiIeothersareimplicative,interpretative,orSuppIetoryandcanbevariedbyagreement.Acontractmaybesimplydefinedasapromiseforthebreachofwhichthelawgivesaremedy,althoughthewordcontract',nayalsobeusedtorefertotheseriesofactsbywhichthepartiesexpressedtheiragreement,tothedocumentwhichtheymayhaveexecuted,ortothelegalrelationswhichhaveresulted.Notallpromiseareenforceableandseveralcriteriamustbemetbeforethelawwillgivearemedy.TwoofthemostfundamentalofthesearetherequirementofawritingandrequirementofConsideration.therequirementofaWrilingisimposedbystatutesoffrauds,derivedfromtheEnglishStatuteofFraudsof1677twhichhavebeenenactedthroughouttheUnitedStates.TypicallytheyProVidethat,withsomeexceptions,specifiedkin(isofcontractsareunenforceableunlessevidencedbyawriting.TheyusualIycovercontractstosellgoodsofmorethanaminimumvalue,contractstosellland,contractstoanswerforlhedebtofanother,andcontractsnottobeperfo11nedwithinayear.Manyagreements,suchasmostcontractstofurnishservices,arenotincludedandareenforceableevenifthereisnowriting.AlthoughdissatisfactionhasledtotherepealofmostoftheEnglishStatuteofFraudsin1954,therehasbeennoseriousmovementforitsabolitionintheUnitedStates.apartfromanyrequirementofawriting,apromiseisnotgenerallyenforceableintheUnitedStatesunlessitissupportedbyconsideration.HistoricalIyapromissorycouldmakeabindingwrittenpromise,evenwithoutconsideration,byaffixinghiswaxsealtothewriting.Butasthewaxsealwasreplacedbyapennedorprintedimitation,thesealbecameanemptyformalityanditseffectivenesshasnowbeeneliminatedoratleastgreatlydiminishedbystatestatutes.Considerationisessentiallysomethingforwhichthepromisorhasbargainedandwhichhehasreceivedinexchangeforhisownpromise.11maybeanotherpromisegiveninreturn,inwhichcasetheresultingcontractisknownasabilateralcontract,oritnaybeanactgiveninreturn,inwhichcasetheresultingcontractisknownasunilateralcontract.But,forexample,agratuitouspromise,includingonetopayforgoodsorserviceswhichhavealreadysupportedbyconsideration.FortunatelythereareonlyafewsuchinstancesofbusinesspromisesinwhichtherequirementofConsiderationisnotmet.Oneofthemosttroublesomeinvolvesthe"firm”,orirrevocable,offer.TheusualruleintheUnitedStatesisthatanofferorhasthepowertorevokehisofferatanytimebeforeitsacceptancebytheofferee,andapromisebytheofferornottorevokeisnotgeneralIyeffectiveunlesssupportedbyconsideration.Acommondeviceforholdingtheofferortohispromiseisthepaymenttohimofanominalsum,forexampleonedollar,asconsiderationforwhatisthenknownasan“option."EvenwithoutConsiderationafewcourtshaveheldthattheofferorwasestopped,orprecluded,fromrevokinghisofferwheretheoffereereliedtohisdetrimentuponthepromise.Butthemostsatisfactorysolutionhasbeenthroughlegislation,adoptedinanumberofstates,makinganofferirrevocable,regardlessofconsideration,ifiIisembodiedinasignedwritingwhichstatesthatitisirrevocable.Asthissuggests,thetendencyhasbeentoattempttoremedythedeficienciesofthedoctrineofconsiderationratherthantodiscardit.IntheIniledStates,contracts,likestatutes,arecharacteristicallydetailedandprolix.Thosepreparedbylawyersareoftencompoundedofstandardclauses,popularlyknownas“boiler-plate,''takenfromotheragreementskeptonfileorfrombooks.Evenwhenalawyerisnotdirectlyinvolved,thepartiesmayuseorincorporatebyreferenceastandardprintedformwhichhasbeendraftedbyalawyer,perhapsforaparticularenterprise,perhapsforanassociationofenterprises,orperhapsforsaletothegeneralpublic.Thisattentiontodetailmaybeduetoanumberofcauses,includingthestandardizationofroutinetransactions>thefrequentinvolvementoflawyersinallstagesofexceptionaltransactions,theinclinationtouselanguagewhichhasbeentestedinpreviouscontroversies,andthedesiretoavoiduncertaintywhenthelawofmorethanonestatemaybeinvolved.Al1oftheseaddtothegeneraldispositionofthecase-orientedAmericanlawyertoprovideexpresslyforspecificdisputeswhichhaveariseninthepastorwhichmightbeforeseeninthefuture.Arelatedphenomenonisthewidespreaduseofstandardfoimsftcontractsofadhesion,“suchastickets,leases,andretailsalescontracts,whichareforceduponthepartywithinferiorbargainingpower.Inrecentyears,courtsandlegislatureshavebecomeincreasinglyconcernedwiththeeffectswhichunrestrainedfreedomofcontractnayhaveinsuchsituations.Courtswhichhadalwaysrefusedtoenforceagreementscontemplatingcrimes,torts,orotheractswhichwereclearlycontrarytothepublicinterest,began,undertheguiseofinterpretingthecontracts,tofavortheweakerpallyandinextremecasestodenyeffecttotermsdictatedbyonepartyevenwherethesubjectoftheagreementwasnotinitselfunlawful.1.egislaturesenactedstatutesfixingterms,suchasmiximumhoursandminimumwagesforemployment,orevenprescribingentirecontracis,suchasinsurancepolicies,andgaveadministrativebodiesthepowertodetermineratesandconditionsforsuchessentialservicesastransportationandelectricity.Nevertheless,inspiteoftheerosionofthedoctrineoffreedomofcontractinmanyareas,thedoctrineisstilltheruleratherthantheexception.译文：1.契约简论奥约法所关切的是实现所约定的义务。通常，奥约责任是以白由同意为基础的。这种同意表现为当事人明示的承诺或事实上由当事人通过行为而默示承诺。但在某些状况下尽管受约束的一方并未同意，法院仍会推定承诺之存在（往往称为由法律推定的契约即准契约），以免有人不当得利.契约法的内容，包括实力、形式、要约与承诺、约因、欺诈与错误、合法与否、说明与推定、履行与其条件、契约目的无法达到和契约无法履行、免责、受让人与受益的第三人之权利和补救方法。契约在很大范围内保持着统一性而依据协议之内容或当事人之性质排斥了不同种类契约之间的基本区分。因此，除若干例外状况外，契约法原则适用诸如个人、企业和政府实体等不同的当事人。契约法大多是州法不是联邦法，但各州之间的契约法只有细微环节之别。契约法主要虽仍为案例法，但处理具体问题的制定法日靛增多了。例如，美国统一商法典就时商品销笆合同之形成设有若干具体规定，而依据作为在这方面最重要的联邦法之一的1887年塔克法（1.1.经修正的），美国政府已因同意在各联邦法院应诉而在契约诉讼中放弃了主权蔚免。某些由制定法（以与案例法）规定的规则是强制的，当事人不得避开；而另一些规则则是含蓄的、说明性的、补充性的，因而可以由协议变更之。不妨把契约简洁地规定为一种承诺。承诺一旦遭到违反，法律就予以补救：虽然，“契约”一词亦可用来指当事人借以表示其协议的一系列行为、指双方当事人所制作的文契或指其所形成的法规关系。并非切承诺都是可以执行的，在法律予以补救之前，承诺必需发和几项标准。其中最重要的两项，是必需有书面形式和必需有约因。书面要件，是由英国1677年欺诈防止法所派生、颁布于美国全国的欺诈防止法所规定的。欺诈防止法一般都规定：特定种类的契约如无书面证明不得执行：但也有例外。通常，这些特定契约包括超过最低价值的商品销售契约、上地买卖契约、担当他人债务的契约和一年后履行的契约。很多协议（如大多数供应服务的契约）则不包括在内，因此即使没有书面形式也能执行。虽然人们的不满导致英国于1954年废除英国欺诈防止法的大部分，但在美国却没有仔细要求废止欺诈防止法的动向。在美国，除要求书面形式外，承诺如无约因的支持，一般也是不能执行的。历史上，承诺人甚至没有约因，也能在文书上盖用火漆印而作出由约束力的书面承诺。但随着火漆印为钢艳或印刷的豆制品所取代，印章:也就徒有其名九因此,其效力现已被制定法所取消，至少也已被制定法所大大限制了。约因主要是承诺人要谈判到手，而且也是承诺人以其承诺换来的某事物。约因可以是对方所回报的另一个承诺（这样形成的契约就是双务契约）或个行为（这样形成的契约便是单务契约工但是，比如说，一个无偿承诺（其中也包括因作出承诺时早已供应了的商品和劳务而作出的承诺在内）是没有约因支持它的。幸好，不符合约因要求的商业承诺，其实例寥若晨星。其中最琳烦的状况之一，涉与到“硬”要约，即不行撤回的要约。在美国，通常的规则是：要约人能在要约经被要约人承诺之前随时撤回，而且要约人关于不撤回要约之承诺，如无约因一股是无效的。使要约人信守承诺的常用方法，是向他支付笔出名无实金额（如美元），作为取得因而被称作“选择权”者之对价。即使没有约因（对价），少数法院也主见：被要约人因信任承诺而蒙受损害时，要约人不得出尔反尔，撤回其要约。但是最令人满足的解决方法，是通过立法（这是某些州的方法）规定要约不问有无约因只要具备答了名的书面形式而且记明不得撤销者，律不得撤销。由此可见，发展的趋势是弥补约四论的缺点而不是棚弃约因论。在美国，契约也同制定法那样，是以具体和冗长为其特征的。由律师拟定的契约往往由标准条款组成，这种条款或取自己归档的其它契约，或来自书木，俗称为“做成纸型的”条款。即使没有律师干脆参加其事，当事人也可以干脆采纳或参照汲取一种标准格式。这种格式早由律师拟定以供某企业或企业联合会之用或公开发售。美国企业特殊重视细微环节，这或许是有些缘由的。其中包括：常规性交易的标准化、特殊性交易之每一阶段往往都有律师参加其事、倾向于运用在过去纠纷中经过考验的语言以与希望能在所涉与的是不止个州的法律时防止捉摸不定的一种愿望。全部这一切更使得以案例为中心的美国律师增加下列愿望：就过去业已发生或今后可以预见的争端，在契约中作出明文规定。一个与此有联系的现象时诸如发售的票子、租赁契约和零售契约之类强加于谈判力差的一方的标掂式“单方面契约（合同）”之广泛运用。近些年来，法院和立法机构对在上述状况下契约自由竟会丝亳不受限制的后果越来越感到关切。过去向对企图犯罪、侵权或为其它明显违反公共利益行为的协议拒不予以执行的法院，现在已起先以说明契约的名义偏护处于劣势的一方，并在趋于极端的案件中拒不承认由方当事人单方面说了算的条款有任何效力一一尽管协议内容本身并无违法之可言.立法机关也颁布r规定诸如雇佣契约中最高I：作时数和最低工资之类的条件甚至规定了整个契约（如保险单之类）并予行政机关以规定诸如运输业和电力业的价格和条件的权力。契约自由论虽已在很多领域遭遇侵蚀，但仍不失其为原则而尚未成为例外。2. Torts1.eadinglegalwritersagreethatnoonehassatisfactorilydefinedatort,thisispartlybecausetortsaresocommon,sowidespreadandsovaried.Youarefarmorelikelytobethevictimofatortthanofacrime,andyouarealsofarmorelikelytocommitatortthanacrime.tortisacivilwrongagainstanindividual.crime,ontheotherhand,isanoffenseagainstthepublicatlarge,orthestate.Anautomobiledriverwhocarelesslybumpsintoyourcarinaparkinglotandcrumplesthefenderhadcommittednocrime.Suppose,however,thatafterleavingtheparkinglotthesamedrivergoestoanearbybar,downssixwhiskeys,thencareensthroughacrowdedcitystreetatfiftymilesanhour.Nowhehascommittedatleastthesecrimes:drunkendriving,recklessdrivingandendangeringthe1ivesofothers.Butunlessheactuallydamagesanothercarorinjuressomeonehehasnotviolatedtherightsofnayindividual.Acrime,then,iswrongfulactagainstsociety.Whenacrimeiscommitted,itisthestate,sresponsibiIitytoinvestigate,prosecuteandbeartheexpenseoflegalactingagainstthedefendant,inthecourthandlingcriminalmatters.Atort,ontheotherhand,isanactthatviolatesyourprivateorpersonalrights.IfyoubelievesomeonehasviolatedyourpersonalrightsbuthasnotactedagainsttheinterestsofthepublicasawholeitisentirelyupIoyoutoseekreliefbysuinghiminthecivilcourts.Ifthepersonwhoyoubelievehaslegallyaggrievedyouisfoundliablethatis,ifthejudgeorjuryfindsthathedidinfactinjureyouoryourpropertyhemayberequired（八）togiveyoureliefbypayingyouiidamages,fortheinjuryorpropertylossyousuffered,(b)todiscontinuehiswrongfulactsor(c)torestoretoyouwhathetookfromyou.Inrarecaseshemaybeimprisoned.AIlmonetarydamagesawardedtoyoubythecourtinyoursuitareofcourseyourstokeep.Bythesametoken,thecostofhiringalawyertohandleyourcaseisyourownpersonalexpireswhetheryouwinorlosethecase.Evenadefendantwhowinsmustbearhisownlegalcosts.Ifthetortisalsoacrime,twoseparatelegalactionsconfrontthewrongdoer:yoursandthestate's.wewi11discusslatertheeffectoftheseactionsoneachother.Buttheyareindependentofeachother.Atortisusuallycominitiedwhensomeoneinjuresyouphysically,damagesormisusesyourproperty,attacksyourreputationwithoutjustificalionortakesawayyourlibertyandfreedomofactionwithoutjustcause.Torecoverdamagesforatortyoumustproveeitherthattheactwasco1111ittedwithdeliberateintent(aswhensomeonecirculatedalettercallingyouathief)orthatitwastheresultofnegligence(asinthecaseofthedriverintheparkinglotwhocarelesslyhityourcarwhenhehadadulytodrivecarefully).Inmostcasesyoumustprovethattheactinflictedactualdamageorinjuries.Amaliciousactthatdoesyounoharm,suchasathreattopunchyouinthenoseorashoveinacrowdedsubway,isnotasufficientcauseforlegalaction.Norareyoulikelytorecoverdamagesfromaneighborwhenthehealthy-lookingelmtreeinhisyardcrashesdownonyourroofinawindstoim.Thecrashwasnotsomethingheintended,norwasittheresultofhisnegligence.Apersonwhoisprovedtohavecommittedatorthaveresultedfromhisact.Amotoristwhosideswipesyourcar,causingyoutoserveandhitapedestrian,isresponsiblefordamagesbothtoyou(fortheinjuretoyourcar)andtothepedestrian(forhisdentalexpensesinreplacingthefalseteethknockedortwhenyourcarhithim).Amuggerwhoattacksyouonthestreet,leadingyou,indefendingyourself,toraiseyourumbrellasoquicklythalyouhitapasserby,isresponsiblebothtoyou(fortheshocktoyournervoussystem)andtothepasserby(forthecostofstitchinguphisscalp),lieisalsoguiltyofacrimeandcanbearrestedandprosecuted.Generallyspeaking,anyperson,youngorold,mentallycompetentornot,isresponsibleforhistorts:fortheconsequencesofhisactionstoothersinjuredbythoseactions.Thesamepersonwhointheeyesofthelawisnotmentallycompetenttocommitacrimemaynonethelessbeheld1iableforcommiHingatort.Almostallemployersareliableforthetortsoftheiremployeesiftheemployeecommitiedtheharmfulactduringthecourseofhisemployment.Thelawusuallyholdsanemployerliableforwhathappenswhenhisemployeeiscarryingorthisinstructionsandworkingonhisbehalf.Bulnotal1employersespeciallynotgovernmentalones.Thedoctrineofsovereignimmunitythatthestatecannotbesuedexceptbyitsownconsentseverelylimitsyourrighttosuegovernmentsandgovernmentalbodesforthetortsoftheiremployees.Somepeoplemaynotbeheldliableintortactions.Amongthemarebusbandsandwives.Whoarenotconsideredresponsibleforeachother,Storts,andparents,whoarenotusuallyliableforthetortsoftheirchildren.Manypeoplearenotawareofthis.Butifyourten-year-oldsoncarelesslyknocksabasebal1throughastorewindowyouarenotlegallyresponsibleforthecostofreplacingitdespitetheowner,Sangryprotests.ThesiIuationchanges,however,ifaparentknowsthathischildhasdevelopedwhatlawyerscallaviciouspropensitytocommitactsthatinjureotherpeopleortheirproperty.Iftheneighborhoodbullyhasahabitofgoingaroundhittingsmallerchildrenandstoningdogsandcats,andifhisparentsknowabouthishabiIualbadbehavior,thecourtmightfindthatitwastheirdutytorestrainandcontrolhim.Iftheyallowhimtocontinueinhisdestructiveways,theymightbefound1iablefordamagehecaused.Inaddition,somestateshavepassedlawsthatdomaketheparentsresponsibleforwillfuldamagecausedbytheirminorchild.Policeofficers,sheriffsandotherpeaceofficersactinginthecourseoftheirofficialdutiesarenot1iableintortunlesstheyuseexcessiveforceorexceedtheirauthorityindischargingtheirduties.Thesamegeneralruleappliestomanykindsol'publicofficialsworkingunderactualorevenimpliedordersfromtheirsuperiors.Youcan,tsuetheovereagertaxcollectorwhochargesyouanexcessiverealestatelevy.Youmaypaythemoneyunderprotestandsuetheseniorofficialincharge,orthemunicipality,forarefundofyouroverpayment,butthecollectorissafe.译文：2.侵权行为主要的法学著作家都同意：i隹也没有给侵权行为卜过个令人满足的定义。之所以如此，其部分情愿在于侵权行为司空见惯、比比皆是而又五花八门。人们可能成为侵权行为被害人的机会要比可能成为犯邪行被害人的机会多得多，而人们可能俄权的机会也要比可能犯罪的机会多得多。侵权是对某个人的民违法行为；而犯罪，则是对全社会或对国家的犯罪行为。一位不慎在停乍场内碰J'你的东西且撞歪了你车上保险杠的汽车司机已经侵扰了你的财产权，但是他没有犯什么罪。可是，假定这位司机在离开停东场后，走进r旁边的一家酒吧间，灌下了六份威士忌酒，然后以每小时五十英里的车速在一条交通拥挤的市内公路上曲线驾驶：那么这下子他至少已经犯下r下列罪行：酗酒驾车、开猛乍和危害他人生命平安。但是除非实际损坏了他人汽车或损害了他人身体，他还没有侵扰任何人的权利。所以，犯罪是针对社会的违法行为。只要有人犯罪，国家就有货任侦查，在刑事法院追诉并负担对被告依法起诉的费用。在另方面，侵权是侵扰他人的私人或人身权利的行为。假如你确定某人虽已侵扰r你的个人权利却尚无侵扰社会作为一个整体的利益，那么是否要上民事法院去告他以谋求救助，这就全得由你自己来确定了。假如你确定此人已经在法律上侵扰r你而且应对此负责一一这就是说，法官或陪审官认为他确已经侵扰r你或你的财产一一那么都可以要求他：（甲因使你受到了人身损害或财产损而向你给付损害赔偿从而使你在法律上获得救助：（乙）停止其违法行为或（丙更原原状。般他是不会坐牢的。在诉讼上由法院判给你的金钱赔偿，当然全归你全部。日期，不管你胜诉还是败诉，你聘请的律师办案的费用就由你自己支付心甚至一个胜诉的被告也得担负他自己的法律费用。假如同一个行为既属侵权又是犯罪，那么违法行为就面临两种