法律英語某些詞匯及訴訟格式.doc

法律詞匯系列盜竊槍支 crime of stealing firearms and ammunition盜竊武器裝備 theft of military equipment道真仡佬族苗族自治縣 Daozheng Mulao Nationality Autonomous County得到證實 to be believed得利者 beneficiary抵觸 contravene抵押 mortgage抵押品 pledge抵押物 mortgage地方人民檢察院 Local Peoples Procuratorate地役權 easement第二審判庭 second tribunal第三者 the third party第一審判庭 first tribunal典當物 pledge調查 investigation調查報告 investigation調查取證 investigate and collect evidence調解 mediate調解和強制措施 mediation and enforcement measure調解書 mediation agreement調解書字號 Written Mediation No.訂貨合同卡片 a card of contract訂立 formation定案結論 verdict定案理由 reason for decision定金 deposit定期減免所得稅 regular reduction of income tax定性 determination on the nature丟棄 waive東北人民政府 Northeast Peoples Government東鄉(xiāng)族自治縣 Dongxiang Nationality Autonomous County董事會 board of directors動機 intention, motive凍干健康人血漿 frozen dry healthy human blood凍干血漿 frozen dry blood plasma凍結 freeze, suspend都安瑤族自治縣 Duan Yao Nationality Autonomous County毒品罪 narcotic drug crime瀆職罪 crime of dereliction of duty獨立的不法行為 independent wrong獨立個案 individual cases獨立核算工業(yè)企業(yè) independent accounting unit獨立請求書 independent claim獨立審判 independent adjudication斷絕 cease提出具體意見 submit detailed opinions on對等原則 principle of reciprocity對等原則并參照國際慣例 the principle of reciprocity and in reference to the international practice對合同詞句應當按照事情是有效的而不是無效的來理解 verba ita sunt intelligenda ut res magis valeat guam pareat對金錢借貸的規(guī)定 regulations of money lending對濫用職權的法律補救 legal remedy for abuses of power對立的一方 opposite party對令狀的發(fā)出作確認 acknowledge the issue of the writ對上訴抗辯 oppose an appeal對書面文件的詞句應當按照對提出詞句的當事人尤為不利的原則來解釋 verba chartarum fortius accipiuntur contra proferentem對外經濟法律顧問處 Foreign Economic Legal Consultancy Office對外經濟律師事務所 foreign trade law firm對外經濟貿易仲裁委員會 Foreign Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission對外貿易經濟合作部 Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic對物訴訟令狀 writ in rem對帳 reconcile, reconciliation多邊公約 multilateral convention多邊國際公約 multi-latreal international conventions多分 a larger share多頭 long position, bull position多頭仲裁 multiple arbitration多于一名人士 2 or more persons多元立法體制 plural legislative structure多元主義 pluralism峨邊彝族自治縣 Ebian Yi Nationality Autonomous County恩施土家族苗族自治縣 Enshi Tujia Nationality Miao Nationality Autonomous County恩恤付款 ex gratia payment二審 second instance二審裁定書 order of second instance二審法院 Court of Second Instance二審判決書 written order of Second Instance二者只能擇其一 the inclusion of one is the exclusion of the other發(fā)回重審 remand a lawsuit for a new trial發(fā)貨人 consignor, shipper發(fā)生法律效力 be legally effective發(fā)現(xiàn) discovery發(fā)行審核委員會 the Issuance Examination Commission發(fā)展規(guī)劃 development plan上訴狀格式中英文對照上訴人（一審被告）： 貿易有限公司，住所地 .法定代表人：蘇慶國，公司經理。The Appellant （The defendant in the first instance）：被上訴人（一審原告）： 工程總公司第一工程公司，住所地 .法定代表人：柴躍進，公司經理。The Appellee （The plaintiff in the first instance）：上訴人因租賃合同一案，不服太原鐵路運輸法院（2001）太鐵經初字第6號民事判決書，現(xiàn)依法提起上訴。The Appellant declines to accept the Civil Judgment with a number of （2001） Tai-Tie-Jing-Chu-Zi No 6 passed by Taiyuan Railway Transportation Court, in respect of the lease contract case, and hereby files the appeal according to law.上訴請求：APPEAL1.撤銷太原鐵路運輸法院（2001）太鐵經初字第6號民事判決書。2.依法認定、改判1998年5月14日上訴人與被上訴人簽訂的房屋租賃合同有效。3.被上訴人承擔違約責任，并履行98年合同義務后，同意解除合同。上訴事實和理由：APPELATE FACTS AND REASONS：首先，上訴人對本案的基本和主導觀點：Firstly, the Appellants basic and leading opinions about the case follow：上訴人認為，根據合同法倡導的當事人意思高度自治和契約自由的理念，以及目前司法實踐中的主流執(zhí)法觀念，上訴人與被上訴人之間共存在三份合同，均應認定為有效合同。該三份合同的主體、標的物、價款基本一致。The Appellant maintains that in accordance with the mentalities of highly autonomous expression of intentions and contract freedom called for in the Contract Law, as well as the mainstream law-enforcing mentalities in judicial practice at present, there exist three contracts between the Appellant and the Appellee, which shall be deemed to be valid. The subjects, matters and considerations involved in the three contracts are basically identical.一、一審法院認定1998年5月14日上訴人與被上訴人簽訂的房屋租賃合同為無效合同，與法無據。I. The first-instance court ascertained that the house lease contract executed between the Appellant and the Appellee on May 14, 1998 was invalid. This ruling is not law-based.二、法院以被上訴人已履行了合同大部分義務，上訴人在雙方訂立合同時已在使用租賃房屋為由認定上訴人先履行抗辯權不能成立，這明顯違反了合同法有關先履行抗辯權的規(guī)定。II. The court ascertained that the Appellants exercise of the right to avoid performing the contract as a defense against the Appellees breach by reason that the Appellee has performed a majority of the contractual obligations and the Appellant was using the lease house when the parties entered into the contract. This ruling is in material violation of the provision of the Contract Law in respect of the defensive refusal to perform the contract.其次，上訴人基于并不完全認可的一審法院判決的幾點抗辯觀點：Secondly, the following are some defensive opinions of the Appellant based on the first-instance judgment which cannot be fully accepted.一、一審法院以2001年后，上訴人與被上訴人之間存在事實租賃關系為由，判決上訴人比照2000年合同的租金標準承擔租金，與法無據。I. The ruling of the first-instance court ordering the Appellant to pay the rental according to the rental standard prescribed in the contract of 2000 by reason that the Appellant was in an actual lease relationship with the Appellee subsequent to 2001 is not law-based.二、一審法院對被上訴人未履約的13平米問題的判決，存在明顯的執(zhí)法錯誤。II. The first-instance judgment on the 13 square meters in respect of which the Appellant failed perform the contract is explicitly wrong in law implementation.三、鑒于一審法院孤立執(zhí)法（只處理2000年合同）的情況，則上訴人在2000年度以后已經給付的租金就不止貳萬元。III. Given the isolated law execution by the first-instance court （i.e. it only considered the contract of 2000）, the Appellant has paid more than RMB20,000 in rental following 2000.四、即便按照在一審法院只處理2000年合同的情形下，對有關裝潢不予補償，亦不公平。IV. Even under the circumstance of only handling the contract of 2000 by the first-instance court, no compensation has been given to decoration, which is unfair either.綜上所述，上訴人認為，上訴人與被上訴人之間共存在三份合同。被上訴人和一審法院對該三份合同在明知和已經查明的情況下，卻有意割裂當事人之間的完整民事法律關系。從而造成一審判決存在片面、孤立執(zhí)法（如只處理2000年合同），加重當事人的訟累。以及一審判決存在執(zhí)法尺度、執(zhí)法理念的不統(tǒng)一、不協(xié)調（如對13平米未追究違約責任）。還有一審判決存在越權司法、違法裁量（如處理2001年房租）的等等問題。為此，上訴人懇請二審法院，能在基于依法查明本案全部事實的基礎上，均衡執(zhí)法，做出公正的裁判！In view of the foregoing, the Appellant maintains that there have existed three contracts between the Appellant and the Appellee. The Appellee and the first-instance court has intentionally isolated the complete set of civil juristic relationships between the parties, thereby leading to one-sided judgment in the first instance and adding burden to the parties litigation efforts. Meanwhile, the criteria for law-enforcement were unbalanced and unharmonious in the first instance, coupled with other problems including entitled law application and illegal ruling. Therefore, the Appellant requests second-instance court to make a fair judgment on the basis of ascertaining all facts of this case.此致北京鐵路運輸中級法院To：Beijing Railway Transportation Intermediate Court上訴人： 貿易有限公司The Appellant： Trade Co., Ltd二00 年 月 日Date：附：本上訴狀副本二份Attachment： two copies of the appeal仲裁裁決書中英文對照雙方當事人：（1） 申訴方/反訴被訴方：賣方（2） 被訴方/反訴申訴方：買方Parties：（1） Claimant/counter-defendant： Seller（2） Defendant/Counter-claimant： Buyer仲裁地：Place of arbitration：事實FACTS1994年，雙方當事人根據某種協(xié)議規(guī)格規(guī)定簽署了3份買賣一種產品的合同。在收到貨運單據后，買方即按合同規(guī)定，支付了全部合同價的90%.In 1994, the parties concluded three contracts for the sale of a product according to certain contract specifications. The buyer paid 90% of the price payable under each of the contracts upon presentation of the shipping documents, as contractually agreed.按第一和第三份合同提供的產品符合協(xié)議規(guī)格，第二批貨物的規(guī)格在裝運前就有過爭議。產品抵達目的地后重新檢驗，發(fā)現(xiàn)其不符合協(xié)議規(guī)格。為便于脫手，經過某種處理，最終買方將產品賣給了第三方，損失慘重。The product delivered pursuant to the first and third contracts met the contract specifications. The conformity of the second consignment was dispute prior to its shipment. When the product was again inspected upon arrival, it was found that it did not meet the contract specifications. The product was eventually sold by the buyer to third parties at considerable loss, after having undergone a certain treatment to make it more saleable.賣方提請仲裁，要求收回10%的合同余款。買方提起反訴，聲稱應從賣方所索費用中扣除買方估計應由賣方賠償買方的一筆費用，即：直接損失費、財務成本費、所損失的利潤及利息費。The seller initiated arbitration proceedings to recover the 10% balance remaining due under the contracts. The buyer filed a counterclaim alleging that the sellers claim should be set off against the amounts which the buyer estimates to be payable to the buyer by the seller, i.e., the direct losses, financing costs, lost profits and interest.一、適用的法律I. APPLICABLE LAW（1） 鑒于合同未含有關實體法的任何條款，故法律問題應根據國際商會仲裁規(guī)則第13條第3款決定。根據該條規(guī)則，仲裁員們應適用它們認為適合的法律沖突規(guī)則所規(guī)定的準據法則。（1） The contract contains no provisions regarding the substantive law. Accordingly that law has to be determined by the Arbitrators in accordance with Art. 13（3） of the ICC rules. Under that article, the Arbitrators will apply the law designated as the proper law by the rule of conflicts which they deem appropriate.（2） 這是一個由不同國際的賣方和買方簽署的在第三國交貨的合同。買賣規(guī)定為船上交貨，故風險在賣方所在國便轉給了賣方。由此，賣方所在國似乎就成為與買賣關系最近的管轄地。（2） The contract is between a Seller and a Buyer （of different nationalities） for delivery （in a third country）. The sale was f.o.b. so that the transfer of risks to the Buyer took place in （the country of Seller）. （The country of Seller） accordingly appears as being the jurisdiction to which the sale is most closely related.（3） 有關國際貨物買賣適用法律的1995年6月15日海牙公約在涉及銷售合同時，將賣方現(xiàn)行居住地法律視為占支配地位的法律。買方所在國加入了海牙公約，賣方所在國則沒有。盡管如此，法律沖突法的總趨勢卻是適用合同主要業(yè)務的債務人現(xiàn)行所在地的國內法。在銷售合同中，此債務人為賣方?；谶@些因素，賣方所在國的法律似乎便成了規(guī)定買賣雙方之間合同的準據法。（3） The Hague Convention on the law applicable to international sales of goods dated 15 June 1995 （Art. 3） regarding sales contracts, refers as governing law to the law of the Sellers current residence. （The country of the Buyer） has adhered to the Hague convention, not （the country of the Seller）. However, the general trend in conflicts of law is to apply the domestic law of the current residence of the debtor of the essential undertaking arising under the contract. That debtor in a sales contract is the Seller. Based on those combined findings, （the law of the country of the Seller） appears to be the proper law governing the Contract between the Seller and the Buyer.（4） 至于賣方所在國法律的適用規(guī)則，仲裁員們依據的是雙方當事人各自陳述的理由，以及仲裁員們從一位獨立咨詢人處所得的信息。根據國際商會仲裁規(guī)則第13條最后一段之規(guī)定，仲裁員們也將考慮相關的貿易慣例。As regards the applicable rules of （the law of the country of the Seller）, the Arbitrators have relied on the Parties respective statements on the subject and on the information obtained by the Arbitration from an independent consultant. The Arbitrators, in accordance with the last paragraph of Art. 13 of the ICC rules, will also take into account the relevant trade usage.二、反訴的可受理性II. ADMISSIBILITY OF THE COUNTERCLAIM（5） 仲裁庭認為，1980年4月11日的關于國際貨物銷售的聯(lián)合國公約（通稱維也納公約）是現(xiàn)行貿易慣例的最好淵源，即使買賣雙方所在國均不是公約的成員國，倘若買賣雙方所在國均為公約成員國，在本案中，該公約不僅可考慮作為貿易慣例適用，而且還可作為法律適用（5） The Tribunal finds that there is no better source to determine the prevailing trade usage than terms of the United Convention on the International Sale of Goods of 11 April 1980, usually called the Vienna Convention. This is also even though neither （the country of the Buyer） nor （the country of the Seller） are parties to that Convention. If they were, the Convention might be applicable to this case as a matter of law and not only as reflecting the trade usage.（6） 維也納公約已在17個國家生效，考慮用它適用于國際貨物銷售中的不符規(guī)格事項有通用慣例，應屬合情合理。維也納公約第38條第1款規(guī)定買方負有“當場檢查或叫人檢查貨物”的責任。買方應在注意或應當注意到瑕疵后的合理期限內通知賣方貨物不符合合同的規(guī)格；否則，他將喪失就上述不符規(guī)格而提起索賠的權利。第39條第1款具體規(guī)定道：“如買方在交貨后兩年之內沒有通知賣方，無論如何，買方都將喪失在貨物不符規(guī)格問題上的申訴權利，除非此種不符規(guī)格構成了對長期擔保的違背”。（6） The Vienna Convention, which has been given effect to in 17 countries, may be fairly taken to reflect the generally recognized usage regarding the matter of the non-conformity of goods on international sales. Art. 38（1）of the Convention puts the onus on the Buyer to “examine the goods or cause them to be examined promptly”. The buyer should then notify the Seller of the nonconformity of the goods within a reasonable period as of the moment he noticed or should have noticed the defect； otherwise he forfeits his right to raise a claim based on the said non-conformity. Art. 39（1） specifies in the respect that： “In any event the buyer shall lose the right to rely on a lack of conformity of the goods if he has not given notice thereof to the seller within a period of two years from the date on which the goods were handed over, unless the lack of conformity constituted a breach of guarantee covering a longer period.”（7） 本案中，買方在合理的期限內已對貨運作過檢查，因為在貨物抵達之前，一位專家曾被請去檢查過裝船。買方也應被認定在合理的期限內，即在專家報告公布后的8天內，就產品瑕疵作過通報。（7） In the circumstances, the Buyer had the shipment examined within a reasonable time-span since （an expert） was requested to inspect the shipment even before the goods had arrived. The Buyer should also be deemed to have given notice of the defects within a reasonable period, that is eight days after the experts report had been published.（8） 仲裁庭認為，就本案情況而言，買方遵守了上述維也納公約的要件規(guī)定。這些要件要比賣方所在國的法律的規(guī)定靈活許多。賣方所在國法律所規(guī)定的買方通知賣方的時限特別短，特別具體，在這點上，似乎是通用的貿易慣例的一種例外。（8） The Tribunal finds that, in the circumstances of the case, the Buyer has complied with the above-mentioned requirements of the Vienna Convention. These requirements are considerably more flexible than those provided under （the law of the country of the Seller）. This law, by imposing extremely short and specific time requirements in respect of the giving of the notice of defects by the Buyer to the Seller appears to be an exception on this point to the generally accepted trade usage.（9） 無論如何，也應當認定賣方已經喪失了援引維也納第38和第39條有關產品不符規(guī)格的任何規(guī)定的權利，因為第40條規(guī)定：“只有賣方知道，或他不可能不知道，或他沒有透露有關的不符規(guī)格的事實，他便不能適用第38和第39條規(guī)定”。實際看來這也是事實，因為書證和口證都清楚表明賣方知道且不可能不知道提交的貨物不符合同規(guī)格規(guī)定。（9） In any case, the Seller should be regarded as having forfeited its right to invoke any non-compliance with the