搜索
•Evensocietiesthatdonotpermitprivateownershipofwealthtothedegreethatoursdoesarelikelytorecognizethepersonalrightsofindividualstobefreefromcertainkindsofconduct…•即使是那些对财产私有权的许可没有达到我们这种程度的社会，也会承认个人的人身权利不受某种行为的侵犯。InflictionofphysicalinjuryOtherinterferenceswithfreedomordignity•给人造成身体伤害•其他对个人自由或尊严的侵犯Ownershipofproperty•Includetherighttouseandconsumethethingowned•所有权包括对属于自己的物品使用和耗费的权利•bemoretotheadvantageoftheownertotransfertherightoftheownershiptosomeotherpersoninexchangeforsomethingelseofvalue•有时所有者以所有权与其他人交换有价值的东西可能更有利•Agreementsforexchangearethemeansbywhichsomeresourcesareassembledandputtoproductiveuse.•交换的契约是将一些资源组合起来，使之得到有效利用的手段。•Someagreementforexchangecallfortheimmediateandsimultaneousexchangeofmoneyforgoodsandservices.•有效交换契约要求现金与货物、服务的立即和同时交换。Exchangeofsignificantsize涉及到大额交易时•Boththeplanningandperformancetobespreadoveraconsiderableperiodoftime•交易的计划和履行都要经历相当长的时间。Thelawofcontracts•Legalmechanismforprotectingtheexpectationsthatarisefromthemakingofagreementsforthefutureexchangeofvarioustypesofperformance.•合同法是保护预期的法律机制，该预期产生于就未来交易各类履行而制定的契约。•Legalproblemsdonotalwaysfitneatlyintothepigeonholesthatlegaltheoristshavecreated.•法律问题不可能总是与法理学家所创立的分类完全相符。•Frequentlytheyraiseissuesinvolvingmorethanonebodyoflaw.•法律问题往往涉及到不止一部法律。Thewebofthelaw•Maynotbequiteseamless•法律之网可能并非结实无缝•Theyarenotironcladandunchanging•法律并非打不破和不可改变。•Judge-madelaw•法官定法•Rulesdistilledfromacompositeofcourtdecisionsinpriorcases.•从以前案件的各种法官判决意见中抽取出来的规则Judicialsystemofdecision-making司法决策体制•Staredecisis遵从前例–adherencetopastdecisions(Precedents)•Apriordecisionwithfactssufficientlysimilartothecase“subjudice”,thatthecourtfeelsobligedtofollowitandtorenderasimilardecision.•以前案例的事实与尚未判决的案件事实非常相似，法院认为有义务按照前例做出类似的判决。从两个方面证明以判例法为主要依据的法律制度的合法性•1.Offersahighdegreeofpredictabilityofdecision…•提高了判决的可预见性程度……•2.Putsareinonthenatureproclivityofjudgestodecidecasesonthebasisofprejudice,personalemotion,orotherimproperfactors.•限制法官在案件判决时以偏见、个人情感或其他不恰当因素为基础的自然癖好。Thecharacteristicofasystem•Whichmaysometimesbeavirtue,sometimesadefect,ofbeingstaticandconservative,generallyorientedtowardpreservationofthestatusquo.•遵从前例的制度的特征是静止和守旧，总体上趋向于保持现状，这有时是优点，有时是缺点。Blindadherence•Whenacommonlawjudgeconcludesthatblindadherencetoprecedentwouldproduceanunjustresultinthecasepresentedfordecision.•普通法法官盲目坚持判例，也会导致对当前案例判决的不公正结果。•Aprecedentisconsideredtobe“binding”onacourtonlyifitwasdecidedbythatsamecourtorbyanappellatecourtofhigherrankinthesamejurisdiction.•避免的方法•同一个管辖区的相同法院或其上级巡回法院作出的先例判决才有约束力。•Otherprecedentsarebe“persuasive”.–其他判例只具有劝导性。•Ifaprecedentofthelattertypeisinfactunpersuasive,thejudgeisfreetodisregardit.•如果后一种类型的判例实际上没有劝导性，法官可以忽视该判例。•Iftheprecedentisnotmerelypersuasive,butbinding,itcannotsimplybeignored.Itmay,however,beavoided.•如果判例不仅有劝导性而且有约束力，那么该判例不能简单地被忽视，但却可以被回避。•Ifthefactsofthepresentcasedonotincludeafactthatappearstohavebeennecessary(“material”)totheearlierdecision,thecourtmay“distinguish”theprecedent,renderadifferentdecision.•如果以前判决不包含对当前案例有实质必要影响的事实，那么法院可以“区别”前例，提出不同的判决。•Iftheearlierprecedentisindeedbinding,butisdifficultorimpossibletodistinguish,thereisoneotherwaytoavoiditseffect.•如果比较早的判例确实有约束力，但是难以或无法区别，有一个其他方法避免其效力。•Ifthecourtofdecisionistheonethatcreatedtheprecedent(orisahighercourt),itcansimply“overrule”theearlydecision.•如果判决的法院与作出先例的法院相同，或者比作出先例的法院等级高，它可以“推翻”以前的判决。Overruling–relativelydrasticaction•Isusuallyreservedforinstancesinwhichthecourtfeelsthattheruleestablishedbytheearlierprecedentwasillconceivedattheoutsetorithasbeenoutmodedbythelaterdevelopments.•推翻前例是个比较激烈的行为，一般在法院觉得以前的判例一开始就设计错误时或者随着以后的发展该判例不合时宜时才采用。•Historically,ascommonlaw普通法•Ratherthanstatute制定法•Exception:“statuteoffrauds”•“欺诈条例”是个例外Requirescertaincontractstobeevidencedbyasignedwriting该条例要求某些合同是书面合同。•Thestatuteoffraudshasitselfbecomesooverlaidbycourtdecisionsthatithasmoreofqualityofcommonlawthanofamodernstatute.•该欺诈条例本身已添加了如此多的法官判决意见，以至于它具有的普通法的品质已经超过其现代制定法的品质。Contractlaw•Essentiallyacommonlawsystem,exceptbeaffectedbyaremarkablemodernstatute,theUniformCommercialCode.•除非受到著名的现代制定法——统一商法典的影响，合同法至今还保留着普通法体系。•Whenacourtdecidedacasegovernedbyastatute,itsreasoningdiffersfromthatusedwhencommonlawprinciplesareapplied.•当法院依照制定法判案时，法院的推论与采用普通法原则时是不同的。•Anycourt,eventhehighestcourtofthejurisdiction,isboundtofollowtheprovisionsofavalidstatutethatapplytothedisputebeforeit.•所有法院甚至最高法院都要依据有效的制定法条款规定来处理提交到它面前的争议。Fundamentalpoliticaltenet•Thelegislaturehasultimatelawmakingpowersolongasitsactswithintheboundsofitsconstitutionalauthority.•社会基本政治原则：只要在宪法授权的范围之内，立法机关有最终的立法权。对制定法文字有不同的解释•Courtsseektoascertainthelegislature’spurposeinenactingit,inordertoadoptaconstructionthatwillbesteffectuatethatpurpose.•法院试图确定立法机关的意图，以便采用能最好地实现该意图的解释。•Preparationandpromulgationofwhatpurportedtobeaccurateandauthoritativesummariesoftherulesofcommonlawinvariousfields•美国法律协会准备和发布各领域精确的权威的普通法规则汇编。TheRestatementofContracts合同法注释汇编•Consistsof“black-letter”statementsofthe“generalrule”•关于“一般规则”的“黑体字”陈述•Supportedwithatleastsomecommentaryandillustration•至少有几个注释和例证作补充•Don’thavetheforceoflaw•没有法律效力•Secondaryauthority次要法源•Remarkablypersuasive非常有说服力•Acourt