閤同法/21世紀法學係列雙語教材

閤同法/21世紀法學係列雙語教材 pdf epub mobi txt 電子書 下載 2025

[美] 亞當·愛潑斯坦,薑棟 著
圖書標籤:
  • 閤同法
  • 法律
  • 21世紀法學係列
  • 雙語教材
  • 法學
  • 民法
  • 商法
  • 法律英語
  • 教材
  • 高等教育
想要找書就要到 新城書站
立刻按 ctrl+D收藏本頁
你會得到大驚喜!!
齣版社: 中國人民大學齣版社
ISBN:9787300220208
版次:1
商品編碼:11830349
包裝:平裝
叢書名: 21世紀法學係列雙語教材
開本:16開
齣版時間:2015-12-01
用紙:膠版紙
頁數:364

具體描述

內容簡介

  本書係統介紹瞭美國閤同法的相關製度、規定及經典案例。本書難度適中,內容編寫精良,在***網上被評為五星級圖書。本書英文難度適中,編寫內容比較基礎,適閤中國學生學習使用。

作者簡介

  亞當·愛潑斯坦,美國密歇根中心大學教授
  薑棟,中國人民法學法學院副教授

目錄

總 目
英文原版書部分(1)
中文輔導部分(287)
細 目
英文原版書部分
PREFACE 17
PART I: COMMON LAW CONTRACTS 19
Chapter 1 The Basics 20
Chapter 2 The Agreement 44
Chapter 3 Consideration 64
Chapter 4 Legality and Capacity 82
Chapter 5 Defenses 102
Chapter 6 The Statute of Frauds 116
Chapter 7 Third Parties 134
Chapter 8 Performance, Completion, and Discharge 148
Chapter 9 Breach of Contract and Remedies 160
Chapter 10 Electronic Contracts 170
PART II: THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE 179
Chapter 11 The Uniform Commercial Code 180
Chapter 12 Shipping and Delivery Issues 192
Chapter 13 Performance of UCC Contracts 208
Chapter 14 UCC Remedies 218
Chapter 15 Warranties 228
PART III: CONTRACT DRAFTING 241
Chapter 16 Contract Drafting Suggestions and Techniques 242
GLOSSARY 263
INDEX 273
中文輔導部分
第一章 基礎 289
第二章 協議 295
第三章 對價 302
第四章 閤法性與行為能力 308
第五章 抗辯 314
第六章 防止欺詐法 321
第七章 閤同第三方 325
第八章 履行、完成與免除 327
第九章 違約與救濟 330
第十章 電子閤同 334
第十一章 《統一商法典》 336
第十二章 運輸與交付 338
第十三章 如何按《統一商法典》的規定履行閤同 341
第十四章 《統一商法典》的救濟方式 346
第十五章 擔保 349
第十六章 閤同起草建議與技巧 352



精彩書摘

基 礎
Law Terminology
1. In fact, the judicial branch of government plays a major role.
judicial branch:司法部門,即the branch of government consisting of the courts, whose function
is to interpret, apply, and generally administer and enforce the laws。Judicial branch 在美國僅僅
是法院係統,不像中國的司法部門包括公安機關、檢察院和法院。盡管作為判例法國傢,但美
國法院首先也是根據憲法和其他成文法來判案。Judicial branch 在美國分為聯邦和各州兩大係
統,名稱和審級不盡相同,管轄權錯綜復雜。聯邦係統法院包括地方法院(the district court)、
聯邦上訴法院(US court of appeals)、美國最高法院(the US supreme court)。州係統法院包括
初審法院(trial court)、上訴法院(appellate court)、最高法院(supreme court)。
2. Giving legal advice without a license would constitute the unauthorized practice of law.
practice of law:律師執業活動,即 the professional work of a duly licensed lawyer, encompassing
a broad range of services such as conducting cases in court, preparing papers necessary to
bring about various transactions from conveying land to effecting corporate mergers, preparing legal
opinions on various points of law, drafting wills and other estate-planning documents, and advising
clients on legal questions. The term also includes activities that comparatively few lawyers engage in
but that require legal expertise, such as drafting legislation and court rules。美國律師執業活動有自
己一套完整的規範,這一規範不僅處於職業倫理的弱強製力地位,而且逐漸成為與其他類型法
律並駕齊驅的、具有強製力的法律範疇。盡管這一套規範是律師行業規範中最重要的一種,但
這種規範還要受到法院判例的司法審查。法院對律師執業行為所作齣的判例具有判例法的效
力,這些判例則集中反映在美國法律協會所主持起草的《律師執業法重述》中。
3. sometimes referred to as Quasi contracts.
Quasi contracts: 準契約, 即 an obligation created by law for the sake of justice; specif, an
obligation imposed by law because of some special relationship between them, or because one of them
would otherwise be unjustly enriched. A Quasi contract is not actually a contract, but instead a remedy
that allows the plaintiff to recover a benefit conferred on the defendant。這一類契約緣起於除契約、
侵權行為等以外的債的發生原因,是指未得到當事人的同意而基於一方自願的行為或其他法律
事實,發生與締結契約一樣的效果。“準契約”是羅馬法上的概念,它包括無因管理、不當得
利、監護和保佐、意外共有、繼承人與受遺贈人的關係等。“準契約”的概念也為《法國民法
典》所沿用。然而近代大多數國傢的立法均排除“準契約”的概念,為無因管理、不當得利設置
獨立的法律要件,並作為發生於本人與管理人之間,或於受益人與受損人之間的債的獨立原因。
4. Courts often employ the parol evidence rule.
parol evidence rule:口頭證據規則,即the common-law principle that a writing intended by
the parties to be a final embodiment of their agreement cannot be modified by evidence of earlier or
contemporaneous agreements that might add to, vary, or contradict the writing. This rule operates to
prevent a party from introducing extrinsic evidence of negotiations that occurred before or while the
agreement was being reduced to its final written form。口頭證據規則(parol evidence rule)是閤同
法上對於書麵閤同內容之外,一方提齣的口頭證據在解釋爭議閤同內容時的效力如何,而發展
齣的一套實體法上的規則。作為閤同解釋規則,美國閤同法中的“口頭證據規則”是指:“如
果閤同主體同意書麵文件是他們之間協議條款的最終和完整的錶達,那麼協議前或同時的證據
就不能被采納用以否定或改變書麵文件或給書麵文件增加新的條款。” 它所排除的,也包括當事
人雙方在最終協議達成之前書寫的和交換的信件、電報、備忘錄和協議草案等書麵證據。
5. This also includes provisions for grievance and alternative forms of dispute resolution (arbitration
or mediation or both).
arbitration:仲裁,即a method of dispute resolution involving one or more neutral third parties
who are usu. agreed to by the disputing parties and whose decision is binding。在美國聯邦法律
體係中,最重要的仲裁成文法為《聯邦仲裁法》(Federal Arbitration Act,簡稱“FAA”)。 判斷
仲裁協議的有效性主要有兩個標準:可分離原則、程序性可仲裁問題。分離原則指主閤同的效
力不一定影響仲裁條款的效力。程序性可仲裁問題是指當事人可以明確授權由仲裁員決定仲裁
程序是否開始。
Language Build-up
1. when the parties have to resort to a court to decide contractual issues.
resort to:訴諸,相當於seek,即make use of something for help。例句:If negotiations fail
we shall have to resort to action。在法律英語中,所謂的訴諸法律即為resort to law,而訴諸武力
則是resort to sword。另外,court of last resort 即為“終審法院”。
2. the other hand, numerous contracts emanate from business agreements involving oral contracts.
emanate from:發源於,例句:Much of the activity is likely to emanate from groups of hackers,
but the lines between private espionage and government-sponsored operations are blurred(大部分此類攻
擊活動都是由黑客組織發動的,但是個人活動和政府背景的入侵行動之間的界限非常模糊)。
Case 1
HARMS v. NORTHLAND FORD DEALERS
602 N.W.2D 58 (S.D. 1999)
在對案例進行分析之前,本案判決中的幾個語言要點值得關注:
1. male and female had to tee off from the amateur men’s tee box.
tee off:發球、開球,即(Individual Sports & Recreations) Golf to strike (the ball) from
a tee, as when starting a hole。錶示“發球”的還可以用serve,但是在高爾夫球賽中錶
示發球的隻能用tee off。
2. Nothing in Continental’s instructions suggested that any different yardages were to
be used for the women contestants.
suggest:暗示、錶明、體現,即to make evident indirectly; intimate or imply。例句:
However, the latest remarks of Emma Marcegaglia suggest that this argument is beginning
to wear thin。當suggest 錶示“暗示”時,其同義詞有hint, imply。
3. We ascribe to contract terms “their plain and ordinary meaning”.
ascribe to:歸因於、認為是,即to attribute to a specified cause, source, or origin。
例句:Many in the Pentagon ascribe to what Washington policy wonks call the“ realist”
theory of foreign policy, which believes in narrowly defined international goals, not reshaping
the world。
為瞭更好地理解本案,判決書中涉及的幾個法律術語有必要做以下解釋:
1. The court also granted summary judgment to Moccasin Creek on its cross-claim
against Northland.
cross-claim:交叉訴訟,即a claim brought against a co-party in the same side of
a lawsuit. That is, a plaintiff brings a claim against another plaintiff, or a defendant brings a
claim against another defendant。交叉訴訟,又稱為交叉請求,是指共同訴訟人中的一
個當事人可以在訴辯狀中對其他共同訴訟人提齣訴訟請求。根據《聯邦民事訴訟規
則》第13 條第7 款的規定,所提齣的交叉請求應當是基於作為本訴或反訴的訴訟標
的的交易或事件而産生的請求,或者與作為本訴之訴訟標的物的財産有關的請求。這
一判斷標準與強製性反訴的判斷標準是相似的,它授權法院在交叉請求的訴訟標的與
正在審理中的案件之訴訟標的沒有足夠關聯時,有權裁決不許某一共同訴訟人提齣交叉
訴訟。但與強製性反訴不同,交叉訴訟是任意性的,而非強製性的。
2. Northland appeals, contending that unresolved legal questions and genuine issues
of material fact existon Harms’ breach of contract claim and Moccasin Creek’s cross-claim.
appeal:上訴,即a proceeding undertaken to have a decision reconsidered by a higher
authority; esp., the submission of a lower court’s or agency’s decision to a higher court for review
and possible reversal。比如,the case is on appeal。在美國聯邦和多數州的法院係統
中,上訴有兩個階段,即從初審法院(trial court)上訴到中間上訴法院(intermediate
appellate court, court of appeals),從中間上訴法院上訴到最高法院。在前一階段中,
上訴是當事人的權利,所以稱為appeal as of right, appeal by right 或appeal of right; 而
在後一階段的上訴過程中,上訴並不當然地成為當事人的權利,通常是由最高法院享
有自由裁量權,決定是否接受上訴,此時,對於想要最高法院對案件進行復審的當事
人來說,隻能請求最高法院的復審調捲令(writ of certiorari),如最高法院認為此案件
確實需要其介入,則嚮中級上訴法院頒發復審調捲令,將所有案捲調至最高法院,由
最高法院進行終審。在刑事案件中,上訴人不得就陪審團對事實問題作齣的裁斷進行
上訴,隻能就法官適用法律的錯誤提齣上訴,因此,其上訴審一般隻進行法律審,且
基本上都是書麵審。
本案的核心問題是關於判定breach of contract 是否成立,此外,還涉及Moccasin Creek 與
Northland 的交叉訴訟和禁止反言原則(estoppel)。
本案的原告是Jennifer Harms( a collegiate golfer at Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota),
本案的被告是Northland Ford Dealers( the contest sponsor)和Moccasin Creek(the Country Club
who hold the golf tournament)。
巡迴法院支持瞭Harms 對兩被告的訴訟請求,認為Northland Ford 確實違約,最高法院肯
定瞭這一觀點。巡迴法院也支持瞭Moccasin Creek 對Northland Ford 的交叉訴訟,但最高法院
駁迴這部分判決,認為問題關鍵是Moccasin Creek 是否違反瞭與Northland Ford 的協定,沒有
配備符閤規格的比賽裝置。
根據比賽規定,Northland Ford 會給第一位hit a hole-in-one at the eighth hole 的高爾夫選手
提供a new Ford Explorer 作為奬勵。但是齣於種種原因,Jennifer Harms 被判定發球起點錯誤、
未達到最小發球距離。因此Northland Ford 拒絕按約定給Harms 提供a new Ford Explorer 的奬
勵: Northland later refused to award her the new vehicle。對於Northland Ford這種違反閤同的行為,
Jennifer Harms 控告Ford 違約:As the contest sponsor, Northland breached its contract to award the
prize in accord with the announced rules。然而Northland Ford 又控告同樣是被告的Moccasin Creek,
認為Moccasin Creek 沒有按照協定建設符閤高爾夫比賽規格的場地以至於發生現在的糾紛。
關於Northland Ford 是否違約,巡迴法院認為毋庸置疑:The circuit court rightly concluded
that there were no issues of material fact on the breach of contract claim against Northland。最高法
院也持這一觀點,認為即使原告Jennifer Harms 迴學校參加校園比賽,也不能成為她放棄此次
比賽奬勵資格的依據,根據禁止反言原則,被告Northland Ford 違約:Northland repudiated any
duty to perform under its contract。Moccasin Creek 沒有要求審查Harms 的控告,而是直接提起
瞭對Northland 的交叉訴訟:Moccasin Creek does not request our review of Harms’ summary judgment
against it; instead, it seeks only to uphold its cross-claim against Northland。被告Northland
Ford 也提起瞭對Moccasin Creek 交叉訴訟的上訴。巡迴法院支持瞭Moccasin Creek 的交叉訴訟,
但最高法院認為由於當事人Moccasin Creek並未提起對該案的重審,因而不必考慮這方麵的事由。
Case 2
HILL-SHAFER PARTNERSHIP v. THE CHILSON
FAMILY TRUST
799 P.2D 810 (ARIZ. 1990)
在對案例進行分析之前,本案判決中的幾個語言要點值得關注:
1. Whether the trial court, on the particular facts before it, correctly granted summary
judgment rescinding the real estate purchase contract on the grounds of lack of mutual
assent.
on the grounds of:基於理由、根據,即derived from, and therefore similar to, an
earlier work. If one work is “on the grounds” of an earlier work, it infringes the copyright in
the earlier work。錶示“根據、基於”的詞語還有according to, base on, on the basis of 等。
2. Later, they directed a title agency to prepare one deed to include the property north
of Butler and another deed to include the property south of Butler.
deed to:立契約把(財産)轉讓給,即grant something, such as land, to som-eone
or to transfer legal title to something to someone。例句:The number of people opting for
the voluntary protected trust deed to help write off their debts rose up by 51%。
為瞭更好地理解本案,判決書中涉及的幾個法律術語有必要做以下解釋:
1. The seller counterclaimed, seeking rescission of the contract.
counterclaim:反訴,即a claim for relief asserted against an opposing party after an
original claim has been made; a defendant’s claim in opposition to or as a set off against the
plaintiff’s claim。反訴是相對於本訴而言的,即本訴的被告針對同一法律關係嚮本訴的
原告提齣的反請求,是指在已經開始的訴訟程序中,本訴的被告通過法院嚮本訴的原
告提齣的一種獨立的反請求。反訴必須是本訴的被告對本訴的原告提起,反訴的當事
人仍然是本訴的當事人,雙方當事人不增加、不減少,僅是訴訟地位的互換。被告提
齣反訴的糾紛必須屬於按通常訴訟程序審理的案件。
2. Buyer“ accepted” seller’s counteroffer and the parties entered into a contract.
counteroffer:反要約,即an offeree’s new offer that varies the terms of the original offer
and that ordinarily rejects and terminates the original offer. A late or defective acceptance is
considered a counteroffer。反要約是指受要約人將原要約的內容加以擴張、限製或變更
後而予以接受的行為。可以把反要約理解為新的要約。反要約本身即是要約,符閤要
約的一般構成要件。一方當事人嚮另一方當事人發齣要約之後,受要約人又嚮要約人
迴復新的要約,從而構成反要約。要約、反要約不斷交復的過程其實就是閤同的談判
過程,直至雙方達成共識為止。
本案的核心問題是:當事人對法律說明書存在誤解,這種lack of mutual assent 的閤同是否
可以解除。此外還涉及初審法院認定缺乏閤意的閤同可以解除是否正確。
本案的原告是Hill-Shafer Partnership( buyer),被告是the Chilson Family Trust(seller)。初
審法院認定閤同缺乏閤意,並支持對於賣方the Chilson Family Trust 的控告。上訴法院駁迴瞭
初審判決,認為問題不在於閤同缺乏閤意,而是單方錯誤,並發迴初審法院重審。最高法院接
受賣方the Chilson Family Trust 的重審請求,反對上訴法院意見,認為不是對法律說明書的誤
解纔導緻閤同的解除,而是沒有閤意導緻沒有可執行的閤同。
根據案情,買方Hill-Shafer Partnership 原本要購買的是the Triangle and Butler North plots
of land。但由於價錢沒有談妥,遂放棄。賣方the Chilson Family Trust 認為這塊地應該有legal
description,並且要經過仔細調查。後來,在賣方的反要約中,legal description 裏並沒有描述
the Triangle and Butler North plots of land,反而是描述另一塊地Butler North and Butler South。
買賣雙方沒有將閤同看仔細即已簽約。後賣方the Chilson Family Trust 發現錯誤要求改正legal
description,買方認為自己有正當理由接受當初賣方的轉讓。於是買方訴賣方不履行閤同,賣
方反訴買方欺詐:buyer sued for specific performance. Seller counterclaimed, alleging fraudulent
concealment and racketeering, and also sought rescission and a decree quieting title in it。
關於賣方是否違約,初審法院支持賣方觀點,同時也認為買方存在欺詐行為,並支持賣方
的産權歸屬要求:The trial court also granted summary judgment against buyer on the specific performance
claim and for seller on the quiet title claim, rescinding the contract for lack of mutual assent。
最高法院支持初審法院的意見,認為閤同缺乏閤意,根本沒有可執行的閤同。

前言/序言


用戶評價

評分

評分

評分

評分

評分

評分

評分

評分

評分

本站所有內容均為互聯網搜尋引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度google,bing,sogou

© 2025 book.cndgn.com All Rights Reserved. 新城书站 版權所有