第二屆“華政杯”全國(guó)法律英語翻譯大賽初賽試題+答案.doc

第二屆“華政杯”全國(guó)法律英語翻譯大賽初賽試題 試題一：（合同法與侵權(quán)法）Contracts also generate general duties of care in dealing with the rights, objects of legal protection and legally protected interests of the contractual partners. Such “collateral” obligations do not normally have any relation to the content of the respective “primary” performance obligation and can therefore in principle become significant in every type of contract. The more ambitious a legal system is in the development of such contractual collateral obligations for the protection of interests already existing independent from the direct performance expectations formed by the contract, the more practical weight is given to the respective concurrence of actions rules, which give details of the relationship of contractual liability with parallel tortuous liability. 合同在規(guī)定締約伙伴的權(quán)利、法律保護(hù)的客體及受法律保護(hù)的利益時(shí)，也產(chǎn)生一般的注意義務(wù)。此種“附隨”義務(wù)通常與各方的“主要”履約義務(wù)的內(nèi)容無關(guān)，因此，基本上在各類合同中都變得很重要。在此類附隨義務(wù)的發(fā)展過程中，一項(xiàng)法律制度越是注重以此來保護(hù)獨(dú)立于合同確立的直接履約期待權(quán)而存在的權(quán)益，就越會(huì)重視行為競(jìng)合的規(guī)則，該規(guī)則會(huì)對(duì)合同責(zé)任與相應(yīng)侵權(quán)責(zé)任之間關(guān)系作出詳細(xì)的規(guī)定。The narrower the scope of contractual duties is, the narrower the overlaps with the area of application of tort law turn out to be. The consequence is in turn, that the area of application of the respective legal principles governing concurrence of actions becomes narrower. A concurrence of actions rule which grants in principle contractual liability priority of application over tortuous liability, has to keep the area of contractual liability narrow in the interest of protecting the victim, if tort law is more favorable to an injured party in an individual case than contract law.合同義務(wù)的范圍越窄，它與侵權(quán)法競(jìng)合的地方就越窄。規(guī)范行為競(jìng)合的法律原則的適用范圍也就會(huì)變得越窄。如果在某一個(gè)案中適用侵權(quán)法可能比合同法更有利于受損害方，那么，原則上規(guī)定合同責(zé)任優(yōu)先于侵權(quán)責(zé)任適用的行為競(jìng)合規(guī)則，須從保護(hù)受害人的利益角度出發(fā)，使合同責(zé)任的適用固定在有限的范圍內(nèi)。 試題二：（財(cái)產(chǎn)法）Subject to the provisions of the Declaration and other provisions of law, a unit owner:(1) may make any improvements or alterations to his unit that do not impair the structural integrity or mechanical systems or lessen the support of any portion of the common interest community; (2) may not change the appearance of the common elements, or the exterior appearance of a unit or any other portion of the common interest community, without permission of the Unit Owners Association (hereinafter called “Association”);(3) after acquiring an adjoining unit or an adjoining part of an adjoining unit, may remove or alter any intervening partition or create apertures therein, even if the partition in whole or in part is a common element, if those acts do not impair the structural integrity or mechanical systems or lessen the support of any portion of the common interest community. Removal of partitions or creation of apertures under this paragraph is not an alteration of boundaries;依據(jù)公告書（類似于物業(yè)管理規(guī)約譯者注）的規(guī)定和其他法律規(guī)定，單元所有權(quán)人：（1）可以對(duì)其單元進(jìn)行修繕或改變，但不得損害共同利益社區(qū)的結(jié)構(gòu)的整體性、機(jī)械系統(tǒng)，或減少共同利益社區(qū)的任何部分的承重結(jié)構(gòu)；（2）未經(jīng)單元所有權(quán)人協(xié)會(huì)（以下簡(jiǎn)稱“協(xié)會(huì)”）允許，不得改變共有部分的形狀，或者單元的外觀，或共同利益社區(qū)其他任何部分的外觀；（3）在獲得 相鄰單元或相鄰單元的相鄰部分的 所有權(quán)后，可以拆除或改變（橫亙單元間的）任何隔墻，或在該隔墻上開口，即使該隔墻的全部或部分屬于“共有部分”，惟上述行為不得損害共同利益社區(qū)的結(jié)構(gòu)的整體性，機(jī)械系統(tǒng)，或減少共同利益社區(qū)的任何部分的支撐。本款所謂隔墻的拆除或在隔墻上開口不屬于對(duì)邊界的改變；(4) may subdivide a unit into two or more units. Subject to the provisions of law, upon application of a unit owner to subdivide a unit, the Association shall prepare, execute, and record an amendment to the Declaration;(5) The amendment to the Declaration must be executed by the owner of the unit to be subdivided, assign an identifying number to each unit created, and reallocate the allocated interests formerly allocated to the subdivided unit to the new units in any reasonable manner prescribed by the owner of the subdivided unit.（4）可以將一個(gè)單元分割為兩個(gè)或兩個(gè)以上的單元。依法律規(guī)定，協(xié)會(huì)接受單元所有權(quán)人請(qǐng)求分割單元的，應(yīng)做好公告書修訂條文的準(zhǔn)備、簽署和登記工作；（5）對(duì)公告書的修訂須由提出分割請(qǐng)求的單元所有權(quán)人簽署，新劃分的單元都應(yīng)有一個(gè)識(shí)別號(hào)碼，以被分割單元所有權(quán)人規(guī)定的任何合理方式將之前分配給被分割單元的利益重新分配給分割后的新單元。 試題三：（法律史）For much of our history, the United States was not a lender but a borrower of law. The United States is a common-law system; and the common law was, in its origins, essentially English. In the first part of the nineteenth century, American courts looked to English law for inspiration, to English jurists and treatise writers. Case law was peppered with citations of English cases. Notable scholar-judges, like James Kent and Joseph Story, also read, absorbed, and tried to import into American law key aspects and insights of European legal thought. The British influence declined throughout the nineteenth century; and in the twentieth century it was all but dead. American cases rarely cite foreign materials. Courts occasionally cite a British classic or two, a famous old case, or a nod to Blackstone; but current British law almost never gets any mention. 在美國(guó)歷史上的很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)期里，美國(guó)并不是法律的輸出者，而是引入者。美國(guó)是一個(gè)普通法系國(guó)家，而普通法基本上是源于英國(guó)的。19世紀(jì)初葉，美國(guó)法院向英國(guó)法、英國(guó)法學(xué)家和法學(xué)專著的作者尋求靈感。案例法中大量引用英國(guó)案例。著名的學(xué)者型法官詹姆斯肯特和約瑟夫斯托里等人還閱讀和吸收歐洲法律思想中的重要方面與見解，并努力將它們輸入到美國(guó)法之中。英國(guó)的影響在19世紀(jì)期間就已減弱，到20世紀(jì)則幾乎消亡。美國(guó)的案例極少援引外國(guó)資料。法庭偶爾援引一兩個(gè)經(jīng)典的判例，某一著名的古代案例，或是表示贊同布萊克斯通的觀點(diǎn)，但對(duì)現(xiàn)行的英國(guó)法則幾乎絕口不提。In the twentieth century German philosophy had some residual influence; and Karl Lewellyn, for one, absorbed a good deal of German legal culture. It is fair to say, however, that American lawyers and jurists have been, on the whole, extremely parochial. At some crucial points, scholars and states people did look abroad. English law influenced the shape of the workers compensation statutes; key phrases were lifted almost verbatim from the English act. The English act, in turn owed something to legislation adopted earlier in Bismarcks Germany. The English Companies Law of 1929 and a Securities Act of 1933 were real influences on the text of the Securities and Exchange Act. Commercial statutes similarly were indebted to British models.在二十世紀(jì)，德國(guó)哲學(xué)仍有些許影響，例如，卡爾盧埃林就吸收了不少德國(guó)的法律文化。但是平心而論，美國(guó)律師和法學(xué)家整體上完全本土化了。在一些特定的方面，學(xué)者和美國(guó)人民的確借鑒外國(guó)的做法。英國(guó)法影響了“勞工賠償法”的制定：關(guān)鍵用語幾乎一字不差地從英國(guó)法案中搬來。反過來，英國(guó)的這則法案則曾受到俾斯麥時(shí)期的德國(guó)法律的影響。英國(guó)1929年公司法與1933年證券法對(duì)證券交易法的內(nèi)容產(chǎn)生了實(shí)際影響。商事制定法也同樣借鑒了英國(guó)的范例。 試題四：（公司法與國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)法） (i) In general. The Department of Commerce (hereinafter called “Department”) normally will attribute a subsidy to the products produced by the corporation that received the subsidy.(ii) Corporations producing the same product. If two (or more) corporations with cross-ownership produce the subject merchandise, the Department will attribute the subsidies received by either or both corporations to the products produced by both corporations.(iii) Holding or parent companies. If the firm that received a subsidy is a holding company, including a parent company with its own operations, the Department will attribute the subsidy to the consolidated sales of the holding company and its subsidiaries. However, if the Department finds that the holding company merely served as a conduit for the transfer of the subsidy from the government to a subsidiary of the holding company, the Secretary will attribute the subsidy to products sold by the subsidiary.一 （一般規(guī)定）商務(wù)部一般認(rèn)定獲得補(bǔ)貼的公司所生產(chǎn)的產(chǎn)品存在補(bǔ)貼。二 （生產(chǎn)相同產(chǎn)品的公司）如果兩個(gè)（或兩個(gè)以上）具有交叉所有權(quán)的公司均生產(chǎn)涉案商品，商務(wù)部將把其中任何一家公司或兩家公司獲得的補(bǔ)貼認(rèn)定為兩家公司生產(chǎn)的產(chǎn)品均存在補(bǔ)貼。三 （控股公司或母公司）如果獲得補(bǔ)貼的公司是控股公司（包括自己也經(jīng)營(yíng)的母公司），商務(wù)部將認(rèn)定該控股公司及其各子公司的銷售總額存在補(bǔ)貼。但是，商務(wù)部如確認(rèn)控股公司僅是補(bǔ)貼從政府流向其子公司的渠道，商務(wù)部部長(zhǎng)會(huì)認(rèn)定該子公司銷售的產(chǎn)品存在補(bǔ)貼。 (iv) Input suppliers. If there is cross-ownership between an input supplier and a downstream producer, and production of the input product is primarily dedicated to production of the downstream product, the Department will attribute subsidies received by the input producer to the combined sales of the input and downstream products produced by both corporations (excluding the sales between the two corporations).(v) Transfer of subsidy between corporations with cross-ownership producing different products. In situations where paragraphs (b)(6)(i) through (iv) of this section do not apply, if a corporation producing non-subject merchandise received a subsidy and transferred the subsidy to a corporation with cross-ownership, the Depart