侵权法(中英文对照)
英美合同侵权法
Case discussion1. Mr. X is regular customer of Mr. Y, the owner of a bookstore. One morning, Mr. X went into Mr. Y’s bookstore, looked at some books, and picked up a book. Because Mr. X forgot bringing money with him, he promised Mr. Y that he would pay for the book the next day. Mr. Y agreed. Is there a contract? If so, classify it within the types in this chapter. (Express contract; unilateral contract; valid contract; executor contract)2. Mr. X called a neighbor and offered to sell her his computer nextweek for 200 dollars. If his neighbor wished to accept, she could call back to him. The next morning, she called back and said she was willing to buy the computer. Is the contract formed bilateral or unilateral? Why? Bilateral contract, because each of the contracting parties makes a promise.3. While Mr. X was gardening in Mr. Y’s yard, Mr. Y was reading abook at home. Then Mr. Y stood by the window and watched Mr.X do the work once in a while. When Mr. X had finished the work.Mr. X asked Mr. Y to pay for his work. Do you think there is animplied or a quasi contract between them? Why? Implied contract课本7 Silence is not an effective acceptance unless an offereetakes the benefit of the offered services.1.If you offer to sell a friend a computer worth1000 dollars for100dollars, your friend accepts the offer. Is there a bindingagreement between you? Yes.课本532. Suppose Mr. X orally offered to sell Mr. Y a used car for 5000dollars. Two days later Mr. X notified Mr. Y that the car was no longer for sale. In that case, could Mr. X end the offer? Yes. Oral contract课本100页3. Assume Mr. X sent a letter to Mr. Y offering to sell a bicycle for50 dollars. Mr. Y sent a return letter to Mr. X rejecting the offer. Aweek later Mr. Y decided to accept the offer. Could Mr. Y accept the bicycle? No, the offer is terminated because of rejecting by the offeree Mr.Y. it is a new offer , Mr .Y is offeror; Mr.X is offeree. So Acceptance Must Be Accepted Only by the Offeree Mr.X.4. Suppose a man helped you pull your car out of ditch. After that,you promised to give him 30 dollars for the help, and the man agreed. Would the promise be binding? No. Preexisting obligations. A promise to do something that one is already obligated….not constitute consideration.课本66页Case discussion:1.Suppose you were induced to buy a second-hand car. Before you bought the car the dealer stated that the engine had recently been rebuilt. Actually it had not. After you bought the car, you had engine troubles and the car stopped running. If you wanted to break thecontract, what defense can you have? Misrepresentation. It is the creation of an impression in the mind of another person which is not in accord with the actual acts of the situation.当事人在订立合同的过程中对另一方所作出的与事实不符的陈述。
(完整版)美国侵权法(中英文)
美国侵权法（中英文）Restatement of the Law，Third，Torts by The American Law Institute美国法学会《侵权法第三次重述》Part One: Intoduction of Torts 侵权法概述Part Two： Apportionment of Liability（Rule Sections）第一部分：责任分担Part Three: Products Liability 产品责任Part One: Intoduction of Torts 侵权法概述在美国，侵权法主要属于各州的法律范畴，而且主要由判例法组成。
侵权行为可分为故意侵权行为（intentional tort)、过失侵权行为（negligence or negligent tort)和严格责任侵权行为 (strict liability tort). 对侵权行为的一般救济方法是对侵权行为所造成的损害予以一定的金钱补偿，在涉及交通事故等领域的侵权赔偿已广范采用了保险赔偿的方式。
Part One: Introduction 基本概念1. The law of tort is still the source of most civil suits in the United States, with damage claims for automobile accidents taking first place. Many circumstances contribute to this: (a) the plaintiff in an American civil suit is ordinarily entitled to try his claim before a jury which will often--and understandably--rely more on human than on legal considerations, for instance when a child has been injured in an automobile accident or through a defective product of a large enterprise;(b) Compensation and damages include not only the actual loss but also the intangible damage. A plaintiff can therefore often play on the human reaction of the jury: for instance, what is appropriate compensation for a permanent disability such as the loss of a limb? (c) American law permits the participation of the attorney in the plaintiff’s recovery (contingent fee) which not uncommonly amounts to 25 to 33 percent of the verdict. As a result of all of these factors, a tort action may be a lengthy proceeding, result in large expenses, for instance through honoraria for experts (which may deter the "small "plaintiff from suing at all), and may end in the award of a very large verdict. It is no linger uncommon that a jury will aware a verdict in excess of ＄100,000. These conditions have been the touchstone for several reform endeavors which will be discussed inmore detail below.在美国，侵权行为法产生的诉讼仍是大多民事诉讼案件的主要来源，其中基于交通事故产生的损害赔偿案件居于首位。
Tort Law侵权法英文版
侵权责任法Tort Liability Law第一章一般规定General Provisions第一条为保护民事主体的合法权益，明确侵权责任，预防并制裁侵权行为，促进社会和谐稳定，制定本法。
In order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of civil subjects, clarify the tort lability, prevent and punishtortious conduct, and promote the social harmony and stability, this Law is formulated.第二条侵害民事权益，应当依照本法承担侵权责任。
本法所称民事权益，包括生命权、健康权、姓名权、名誉权、荣誉权、肖像权、隐私权、婚姻自主权、监护权、所有权、用益物权、担保物权、著作权、专利权、商标专用权、发现权、股权、继承权等人身、财产权益。
Those who infringe upon civil rights and interests shall be subject to the tort liability according to this Law.“Civil rights and interests” in this Law include the right to life, right to health, right to name, right to reputation, right to honor, right to portrait, right of privacy, marital autonomy, guardianship, ownership, usufruct, security interest, copyright, patent right, exclusive right to use a trademark, right to discover, equities, right of succession, and other personal and property rights and interests.第三条被侵权人有权请求侵权人承担侵权责任。
法律英语专题：侵权法(tort law)
torts against tቤተ መጻሕፍቲ ባይዱe person
assault battery false imprisonment intentional infliction of emotional distress
.
General
property torts
trespass to land trespass to chattels (personal property) conversion
Statutes have been passed in attempts to ‘reform’ the tort system.
.
General
Most of them have related to procedural matters and amounts and categories of damages.
With the tort of assault, a perceived threat by the victim is paramount.
.
Assault
＊A defendant who throws a rock at a sleeping victim and misses can only be guilty of the attempted battery assault, since the victim would not be aware of the possible harm.
US tort law
Tort law in the U. S. is largely common law.
Courts have the power to shape and change the elements of claims and defenses of existing torts and the power to create new torts.
美国侵权法中英文
美国侵权法(中英文)Restatement of the Law , Third , Torts by The American Law Institute美国法学会《侵权法第三次重述》Part One: In toduction of Torts 侵权法概述Part Two : Apportionment of Liability ( Rule Sections )第一部分：责任分担Part Three: Products Liability 产品责任Part One: In toduction of Torts 侵权法概述在美国，侵权法主要属于各州的法律范畴，而且主要由判例法组成。
侵权行为可分为故意侵权行为(intentional tort) 、过失侵权行为(negligenee or negligent tort) 和严格责任侵权行为(strict liability tort). 对侵权行为的一般救济方法是对侵权行为所造成的损害予以一定的金钱补偿，在涉及交通事故等领域的侵权赔偿已广范采用了保险赔偿的方式。
Part One: In troductio n 基本概念1. The law of tort is still the source of most civil suits in the Un ited States,with damageclaims for automobile accidents taking first place. Manycircumstances con tribute to this: (a) the plai ntiff in an America n civil suit is ordin arilyentitled to try his claim before a jury which will often--and understandably--rely more on huma n tha n on legal con siderati ons, for in sta nee whe n a child has bee n injured in an automobile accide nt or through a defective product of a largeen terprise; (b) Compe nsati on and damages in clude not only the actual loss but also the intangible damage. A plaintiff can therefore often play on the humanreactionof the jury: for instanee, what is appropriate compensation for a permanent disability such as the loss of a limb? (c) American law permits the participation of the attor ney in the pla in tiff ' s recovery (con ti ngent fee) which not un com monly amounts to 25 to 33 perce nt of the verdict. As a result of all of these factors, a tort actio n m ay be a len gthy proceedi ng, result in large expe nses, for in sta nee through hono raria for experts (which may deter the "small "plai ntiff from suing at all), and may end in the award of a very large verdict. It is no lin ger un com mon that a jury will aware a verdict in excess of $ 100,000. These con diti ons have bee n the touchst one for several reform en deavors which will be discussed in more detail below.在美国，侵权行为法产生的诉讼仍是大多民事诉讼案件的主要来源，其中基于交通事故产生的损害赔偿案件居于首位。
法律英语专题：侵权法(tort-law)
Tort Law
General
Tort
a civil wrong which unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm
★It does not include breach of contract or trust. (A civil wrong can be a tort, breach of contract or breach of trust.)
Many judges utilize the Restatement of Torts (2nd) as an influential guide.
The Restatement is an influential treatise issued by the American Law Institute, which summarizes the general principles of common law United States tort law.
With the tort of assault, a perceived threat by the victim is paramount.
Assault
＊A defendant who throws a rock at a sleeping victim and misses can only be guilty of the attempted battery assault, since the victim would not be aware of the possible harm.
法律英语专题侵权法tort law
IIED
Definition
★short for intentional infliction of emotional distress
★referred to as the tort of outrage in some jurisdictions
intentional conduct that results in extreme emotional distress
A person refused to inform another of the whereabouts of that other's child for several years, though the person knew where the child was the entire time.
was riding, causing him to fall and be injured mixing something offensive in food that he knows another will eat—the other does in fact eat the offensive matter
US tort law
Tort law in the U. S. is largely common law.
Courts have the power to shape and change the elements of claims and defenses of existing torts and the power to create new torts.
Statutes have been passed in attempts to ‘reform’ the tort system.
《侵权责任法》英语
《侵权责任法》英语一、单词1. Tort [tɔːt]- 释义：侵权行为（不包括违约等行为的民事过错）。
- 用法：常与“liability”（责任）搭配使用，如“tort liability”（侵权责任）。
- 双语例句：A tort is a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy.（侵权行为是一种民事过错，法律为此提供救济。
）2. Liability [ˌlaɪəˈbɪləti]- 释义：责任；债务；倾向。
- 用法：可用于表达法律上的各种责任，如“tort liability”（侵权责任），“limited liability”（有限责任）。
- 双语例句：Thepany denies any liability for the accident.（公司否认对事故负有任何责任。
）3. Compensation [ˌkɒmpenˈseɪʃn]- 释义：补偿；赔偿金；报酬。
- 用法：在侵权法中，常表示对受害人的赔偿，如pensation for damages”（损害赔偿）。
- 双语例句：The victim is entitled to receivepensation for his injuries.（受害人有权就其受伤获得赔偿。
）4. Damages [ˈdæmɪdʒɪz]- 释义：损害赔偿金；损害；损失。
- 用法：通常复数形式使用，如“claim damages”（要求损害赔偿）。
- 双语例句：The court awarded him substantial damages.（法院判给他巨额损害赔偿金。
）5. Negligence [ˈneɡlɪdʒəns]- 释义：疏忽；过失；粗心大意。
- 用法：是侵权责任的一个重要概念，如“negligence liability”（过失责任）。
- 双语例句：The accident was caused by his negligence.（事故是由他的疏忽造成的。
美国统一州法委员会《统一侵权责任分担法》(中英文对照参考译本)
美国统一州法委员会《统一侵权责任分担法》（中英文对照参考译本）（2003年最后修订版）Uniform Apportionment of Tort Responsibility Act（Rule section•Last Revised or Amended in 2003）Copyright ©2003 byNCCUSL（National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws）译者说明：本文系作者参与2006年中国法学会部级法学研究课题“中国侵权责任法立法研究”（立项编号：CLS（2006）YB14）过程中，为学习和研究目的而进行的翻译。
本文件仅供个人学习、研究之用，仅供参考，请勿作他用，后果自负。
相关译文具体细节请参见注释。
第1条简称本“法”被引用时应被称为《统一侵权责任分担法》SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.This [act] may be cited as the Uniform Apportionment of Tort Responsibility Act.第2条定义在本“法”中：（1）“混合过错[1]”包括混合过失、产品误用、不合理的未能避免或者减轻损害，以及自甘风险除非该风险已经在某一具有法律强制力的免责或者类似协议中被明示。
（2）“人”是指一个自然人[2]、法人、企业联合[3]、遗产[4]、信托、合伙、有限责任公司、协会、合资企业、公众公司、政府，或者政府部门、代理以及所属分支机构，或者其他任何法律或商业实体。
（3）“被免责人”是指如果未因第8条（或第9条）被免除责任则要对请求权人[5]关于人身损害或者财产损失的赔偿金负责的人（4）“责任”，就关于人身损害或者财产损失的赔偿金而言，是指作为责任基础或者全部或部分抗辩的作为或者不作为的法律后果。
立法指南：如果本法第9条被采纳作为本法的一部分，第3款对“被免责人”定义中的括号就应该被去掉。
欧洲侵权法原理中英文对照
European Group on Tort Law European Group on Tort Law Principles of European Tort Law 欧洲侵法基本原权权TITLE I. Basic Norm 第一篇．基本概念Chapter 1. Basic Norm 第一章．基本概念Art. 1:101. Basic norm 第一条：101．基本概念(1) A person to whom damage to another is legally at tributed is liable to compensate that damage. (1) 任何在法律上对第三方造成损害的行为人应承担赔偿责任．(2) Damage may be attributed in particular to the person(2) 损害赔偿应尤其由下列各方承担：a) whose conduct constituting fault has caused it; or a) 其行为构成过错并造成损失的一方；或b) whose abnormally dangerous activity has caused it; orb) 从事异常危险的活动且造成损失的一方；或c) whose auxiliary has caused it within the scope of his functions.c) 其附属机构在其职责范围内造成损失的一方。
TITLE II. General Conditions of Liability 第二篇．责任原则Chapter 2. Damage 第二章．损害Art. 2:101. Recoverable damage 第二条：101．可受偿损失Damage requires material or immaterial harm to a leg ally protected interest. 该损失必须对合法保护的利益造成物质上或非物质上的损害。
侵权法文献翻译稿(中英对照)
Numerous writers have proposed modifying traditional tort rules [FN1] to permit plaintiffs to recover from a defendant who contributed to the risk of causing the plaintiff's harm without proving that the defendant actually caused the harm. [FN2] These proposals would determine recovery *1202 by multiplying the plaintiff's total damages by the percentage chance that the defendant caused the damages, thereby giving her a portion of her damages.许多学者建议改变传统的侵权规则，以使在被告引起了原告的损害的危险而原告不能证明被告确实引起了损害的情况下，原告能够获得赔偿。
[fN2]这些建议通过增加被告可能造成的损失占原告总损失的百分比乘，从而决定赔偿的范围，以赔偿受害者部分损失。
Although these proposals for proportional liability take many forms, they may be divided into three major categories. The "proportional damage recovery" category would permit a plaintiff to recover a portion of her damages only after she has suffered the injury or acquired the disease. [FN3] Thus, if a defendant created a twenty percent probability of having caused the harm, an injured plaintiff would recover twenty percent of her damages. If a defendant created a sixty percent probability of having caused the harm, the plaintiff would recover sixty percent of her damages. By contrast, the "proportional risk recovery" category would permit a plaintiff to recover a portion of her prospective damages before she has been injured or made ill. Thus, if a defendant exposed ten persons to a toxin that created a ten percent risk of causing a certain disease in the future, each exposed person would recover ten percent of her prospective damages in advance.[FN4]虽然这些比例责任的建议采取许多形式，它们仍可以被分为三种主要的类型。
美国侵权法案例1（英文）
美国侵权法案例1（英⽂）Question #1Every Saturday morning, Peter takes his six-year-old daughter to swimming lessons at Briarwood Fitness Center. He and his daughter are not members of the Center: he has merely bought a series of swimming lessons given in the Center’s teaching pool by Center staff. Normally, Peter sits beside the swimming pool while his daughter’s lesson proceeds. One Saturday morning, he leaves the side of the pool while his daughter is swimming. He wanders around the Center, inspecting the facilities. He watches some racketball games, looks into the beauty shop and cafeteria, then goes into the weight room. He decides to try out one of the weight machines.Remembering his healthy youth, Peter selects a very heavy weight. He releases the brake on the machine, which sustains the weight until the user is ready to exercise. He rapidly discovers that he cannot sustain the weight that he has selected. His body crumples under the weight. Peter finds that he can only get out from underneath the weight by twisting and falling out of the machine. In doing so, he severely injures his back.The weight machine in question is manufactured by DominaFlex, Inc. It bears a warning sticker next to the place where the user selects the weight to be lifted. The warning says: “WARNING. Always use spotters when you lift. Do not use this equipment without first receiving instruction or reading the information booklet.”A “spotter” is someone who stands by the machine while the user is using it, to watch, encourage and give assistance if needed. Peter says he did not know what the term means.Members of the Center are given instruction in how to use the weight machines before they are allowed to use the weight room. Although use of the weight room is supposed to be confined to Center members, there is no sign on the door of the weight room to that effect, nor has the Center put up any warning sign of its own by the machine. The instruction booklet was not left by the machine.Peter wishes to sue both Briarwood Fitness Center and DominaFlex, Inc. Advise Peter about the issues that would be raised in these actions.(Assume that the incident occurred in a jurisdiction that has not modified the traditional rules of occupier’s liability in any way, and where the law of products liability is based on the Restatement (Second) of Torts, Section:402A.). Peter v. Briarwood1. Occupier’s liabilityBecause Peter was injured in a jurisdiction that has not modified the traditional rules of occupier’s liability, the first question must be what kind of ent rant he was, because Briarwood’s duty as occupier of the premises in question is different for different classes of entrant.The highest duty of care is owed to invitees. An invitee is either someone who uses a public space made generally available to the public at large (a public invitee) or someone who enters private premises to engage in some kind of business transaction that might benefit the occupier (a business invitee). Although many entrants use it, Briarwood Fitness Center is not a public building,so Peter cannot be a public invitee. Like many businesses, the Center is open to any member of the public who wishes to enter, but it is privately owned. If Peter is to be classed as an invitee, he can only be a business invitee.Peter is in the Center building to attend his daughter’s swimming lessons. He has paid the Center for those lessons, so he is plainly a business invitee when attending the lessons, even though he is not a member of the Center. However, Peter’s injuries were not sustained in the pool area. It is quite possible for a person’s entrant status to change from one part of a building to another. For example, if a hotel guest walks through a door clearly marked “No Entry: Staff Only”, he or she would cease to be an invitee and would become a trespasser.In the present case, Peter has left the part of the Center where he was clearly a business invitee and has gone into a part of the building that was only open to members. The fact that Peter was not a member does not necessarily mean that he became a trespasser when he entered the weight room. There was no sign on the door stating that the weight room was only open to members. Other parts of the Center, such as the beauty shop and cafeteria, were obviously operating as businesses with a general invitation to members of the public to go inside and do business. There was no visible sign to distinguish the weight room from those other businesses.A person can be a business invitee without actually conferring a benefit on the occupier, if the c ircumstances are such thatthe occupier’s premises are open to anyone who might confer a benefit. For example, any person who walks into a store during regular business hours is a business invitee whether or not he or she intends to buy a particular item and whether or not he or she actually buys anything. Peter would plainly have been a business invitee in the beauty shop and cafeteria. If he entered the weight room to check it out, possibly with a view to becoming a member, then he would be a business inv itee in the same way. The Center’s rule is that the weight room should only be used by members; it does not preclude non-members from even entering the room. Peter may well have remained a business invitee when entering the weight room. At the very least, it seems likely that he was a licensee, which is someone who enters premises with the permission of the occupier but for his or her own purposes, without the intention to confer a benefit on the occupier. The door of the weight room was open and there was no sign indicating that it was any more private than any of the other spaces in the Center. That should be enough to establish the Center’s permission for entrants like Peter to enter the room. Implied permission to use the machines in the room would be slightly more difficult to find, but in the circumstances it seems unlikely that Peter would be considered a trespasser. That is a possibility, however. He did not actually have permission to use the machines. The mere fact that he could walk freely into the room would not automatically create the impression that he could freely use the machines in the room.2. Occupier’s standard of careIf Peter was a business invitee in the weight room, then Briarwood owed him a duty of reasonable care, which would extend to warning him of any of the dangers of the property and also to making reasonable efforts to determine whether any such dangers existed. The machine had no warningsigns and there is nothing to indicate that Briarwood had made any effort to determine whether passers-by like Peter were using the machines. It may, however, have been an “open and obvious danger”, in which case Briarwood would have owed no duty to take protective steps in relation to it. The heaviness of the weights was obvious and the risk of lifting them should have been clear to Peter as well as Briarwood.If Peter was merely a licensee in the weight room, Briarwood’s duty would be confined to one of warning him about concealed dangers known to it but not him. As noted above, the dangerousness of the machine does not seem to be particularly concealed. An occupier is not liable to a licensee who is injured by a condition of the premises of which both are aware.If Peter was a trespasser when using the weight machine, Briarwood’s duty is on ly to avoid willful and wanton misconduct designed deliberately to harm him. Peter’s action against Briarwood would obviously fail if he fell into this category. There is nothing about the presence of the machine that amounts to a deliberate attempt by Briarwood to harm trespassers.3. Comparative faultIf Peter is entitled to recover from Briarwood for a breach of any of the occupier’s duties, his recovery may be reduced on account of his own contributory negligence. His decision to lift without a spotter was unwise, even though he says that he did not know what the warning sign about “spotters” meant. A reasonable person would realize the dangers in lifting a heavy weight without practice or training. It seems likely that Peter failed to take reasonable care for his own safety. If the injury occurred in a jurisdiction with a modified comparative fault regime, which denies recovery altogether if the plaintiff’s fault is greater than the defendant’s, Peter’s action may fail completely.II. Peter v. Dominaflex1. Design defectBecause Peter suffered his injury in a state where products liability is governed by Section:402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, his action against Dominaflex will allege that the weight machine was a product “in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user”. There is nothing to indicate that the machine was badly manufactured, so his action would have to allege that it was poorly designed. It operated exactly as intended: the whole purpose of the machine is to put some amount of stress on the user’s muscles. The design defect, if any, could only be the absence of some kind of fail-safe mechanism to take the place of a “spotter” for lone users, supporting the weight if the user could no longer handle it.Some Section:402A states test the defectiveness of product design by reference to the expectations of “ordinary consumers”, some by reference to a “risk-utility” standard, and some by a combination of both for different kinds of product (”ordinary consumer expectation” for simpleeveryday products, “risk-utility” for more complex ones). We do not know what test is applied in the jurisdiction where Peter was injured.The question whether an “ordinary consumer” would expect the machine to have a fail-safe mechanism would be one for the jury to answer applying common sense standards. Some weight machines do have foot-operated levers that support the weight, so an “ordinary consumer” might have the expectation that all machines should be equipped with something similar.If the “risk-utility” standard is applied, it will be necessary to determine whether the risks posed by the machine could have been reduced without lessening its utility. That will involve consideration of the cost of installing a fail-safe mechanism and its effect on the operation and ease of use of the machine.2. Effect of warningWarning labels can be sufficient to render safe a product that carries some inherent risk of harm. The weight machine in the present case bore such a warning label. However, that label used a rather technical term (”spotters”) and it referred to an instruction booklet. There was an obvious risk that the instruction booklet would not be kept with the machine at all times and that the machine might be used by users who would not able to consult the booklet first. In the circumstances, it seems unlikely that the warning would be sufficient to relieve Dominaflex from liability if the design of the machine were to be held to be defective.3. Comparative faultLastly, it is necessary again to consider the possibility that Peter may have failed to take reasonable care for his own safety. Any comparative fault on his part would have a different effect in the action against Dominaflex than it would in the action against Briarwood. In General Motors v. Sanchez (Tex, 1999), it was held that comparative negligence of a product user should only operate to reduce recovery if it goes beyond a failure to discover and guard against the defect in the product. Peter’s mistake was to use the machi ne without realizing that it could harm him if he chose too heavy a weight, because there was no fail-safe device. If the Dominaflex machine was defectively unsafe, Peter’s fault therefore seems to have been only a failure to recognize and guard against the defect. Applying the Sanchez test, that would not lead to a reduction of his recovery. His recovery would only be reduced if he had used the machine in some way that went beyond a failure to identify the danger created by its defect.。
侵权法(中英文对照)
中华人民共和国侵权责任法Tort Law of the People’s Republic of China English version中文版发文日期：2009年12月26日有效范围:全国发文机关:全国人民代表大会常务委员会文号：中华人民共和国主席令第21号时效性：现行有效生效日期：2010年07月01日所属分类：侵权( 民法->侵权）Promulgation date: 12—26-2009Effective region： NATIONALPromulgator： Standing Committee of the National People’s CongressDocument no: Order of the President of the People's Republic of China No. 21Effectiveness: EffectiveEffective date： 07-01—2010Category: Tort ( Civil Law—>Tort ）全文: Full text:中华人民共和国侵权责任法Tort Law of the People’s Republic o f China中华人民共和国主席令第21号Order of the President of the People's Republic of China No. 212009年12月26日December 26, 2009《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》已由中华人民共和国第十一届全国人The Tort Law of the People's Republic of China，adopted at the 12th session of the Standing Committee of the 11th National People’s Congress of the People's Republic of民代表大会常务委员会第十二次会议于2009年12月26日通过,现予公布,自2010年7月1日起施行. China on December 26, 2009, is hereby promulgated and shall come into effect on July 1，2010.中华人民共和国主席胡锦涛President of the People's Republic of China Hu Jintao中华人民共和国侵权责任法Tort Law of the People's Republic of China（2009年12月26日第十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十二次会议通过）Adopted at the 12th session of the Standing Committee of the 11th National People’s Congress of the People's Republic of China on December 26, 2009目录第一章一般规定第二章责任构成和责任方式第三章不承担责任和减轻责任的情形第四章关于责任主体的特殊规定第五章产品责任第六章机动车交通事故责任第七章医疗损害责任第八章环境污染责任ContentsChapter I General ProvisionsChapter II Constitutive Requirements of Liability and Methods for Assuming LiabilityChapter III Circumstances under which Liability Is Waived or MitigatedChapter IV Special Provisions on Liable PartiesChapter V Product LiabilityChapter VI Automobile Traffic Accident LiabilityChapter VII Medical Malpractice LiabilityChapter VIII Environmental Pollution LiabilityChapter IX High—Risk Operation LiabilityChapter X Liability for Damage Caused by Domesticated AnimalsChapter XI Liability for Damage Caused by Objects Chapter XII Supplementary Provisions第九章高度危险责任第十章饲养动物损害责任第十一章物件损害责任第十二章附则第一章一般规定Chapter I General Provisions第一条为保护民事主体的合法权益，明确侵权责任，预防并制裁侵权行为,促进社会和谐稳定，制定本法。
侵权法词汇(英汉)
侵权法词汇英汉对照restatement of torts 侵权法重述writs 令状the action of trespass 直接侵权诉讼the action on the case 间接侵权诉讼intentional torts 故意侵权battery 殴打harmful and offensive contact 伤害性和冒犯性接触punitive damage 惩罚性赔偿assault 威吓apprehension 警觉false imprisonment 非法监禁boundary 监禁的区域intentional infliction of mental distress 故意精神伤害fault 过错trespass to land / chattels 侵犯他人土地/财产wrongful life 错误生存possessory rights 占有权conversion 侵占他人财产consent 原告同意self-defense 自我防卫defense of others 防卫他人defense of property 保护财产recovery of chattels 夺回财产re-entry on land 恢复失地public/priviate necessity 公共/私人紧急避难necessity 紧急避难discipline 管教negligence 过失侵权reasonable man 合理人unreasonable risk 不合理风险duty 责任wrongful birth 错误出生breach of duty 不履行责任proximate cause 最近原因legal cause 法律原因actual loss or damage实际损失或伤害the duty of care 谨慎的责任foreseeable plaintiff 可预见的原告unforeseeable plaintiff 不可预见的原告zone of danger 危险区professionals informed consentmalpractice professional negligence。
法律英语 第十课 侵权法
American law permits
the participation of the attorney in the plaintiff’s recovery (contingent fee) 美国允许律师分享原告所获得的赔偿 金（胜诉酬金） Amount to 25 to 33% of the verdict 酬金达到法院判付金额的25-33%。
2013-7-11
法律英语
10
A tort action 侵权诉讼
A lengthy proceeding –诉讼程序时间长 Large expenses — honoraria for experts –代价大（专家证人的酬金） A very large verdict （ in excess of $100000） –判决金额非常大（10万美元以上）
2013-7-11 法律英语 18
Part 3: Liability for Negligence 过失侵权的责任
Negligent act
Causality
Injury
2013-7-11
法律英语
19
A person is negligent
if he has not complied with his ―duty of care‖ and ,has not acted as ―a reasonable and prudent man‖.
2013-7-11
法律英语
23
No claim for compensation不能要求赔偿
The injured party has been guilty of contributory negligence – 共同过失 has assumed the risk – 预计到有危险
侵权法文献翻译稿中英对照
侵权法文献翻译稿中英对照原文在当代社会，侵权法的作用日益凸显，其对于维护社会公平正义、保障公民合法权益具有至关重要的意义。
侵权行为的界定与责任承担成为了法律领域中的关键问题。
首先，我们需要明确侵权行为的构成要件。
一般而言，侵权行为包括过错、损害后果、因果关系以及违法行为这几个要素。
过错可以分为故意和过失两种形式。
故意侵权是指行为人明知自己的行为会导致损害后果，仍然积极追求或者放任这种结果的发生；而过失侵权则是指行为人应当预见自己的行为可能会造成损害后果，但由于疏忽大意或者过于自信而没有预见。
损害后果是侵权行为所导致的直接或间接的损失，包括财产损失、人身伤害以及精神损害等。
因果关系则要求侵权行为与损害后果之间存在直接的、必然的联系。
违法行为通常是指违反了法律规定的义务或者禁止性规定。
在侵权责任的承担方式上，主要包括停止侵害、排除妨碍、消除危险、返还财产、恢复原状、赔偿损失、赔礼道歉、消除影响、恢复名誉等。
这些责任方式的适用，需要根据具体的侵权情况和法律规定来确定。
译文In contemporary society, the role of tort law has become increasingly prominent, as it is of vital significance for maintaining social fairness and justice and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of citizens The definition of tortious acts and the assumption of liability have become key issues in the field of lawFirstly, we need to clarify the constituent elements of tortious acts Generally speaking, tortious acts include several elements such as fault, damage consequence, causal relationship, and illegal act Fault can be divided into two forms: intentional and negligent Intentional tort refers to the situation where the actor is aware that his act will lead to damage consequences but still actively pursues or allows such results to occur; while negligent tort means that the actor should have foreseen that his act might cause damage consequences but failed to do so due to negligence or overconfidenceDamage consequence refers to the direct or indirect losses caused by the tortious act, including property loss, personal injury, and mental damage, etc The causal relationship requires a direct and inevitable connection between the tortious act and the damage consequence Illegal act usually refers to the violation of legal obligations or prohibitive provisionsIn terms of the assumption of tort liability, the main methods include cessation of the infringement, removal of obstacles, elimination of danger, return of property, restoration to the original state, compensation for losses, apology, elimination of influence, and restoration of reputation, etc The application of these liability methods needs to be determined according to the specific tort situation and legal provisions原文此外，共同侵权行为也是侵权法中的一个重要概念。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
中华人民共和国侵权责任法Tort Law of the People's Republic of China English version中文版发文日期：2009年12月26日有效范围：全国发文机关：全国人民代表大会常务委员会文号：中华人民共和国主席令第21号时效性：现行有效生效日期：2010年07月01日所属分类：侵权( 民法->侵权) Promulgation date: 12-26-2009Effective region: NATIONALPromulgator: Standing Committee of the National People's CongressDocument no: Order of the President of the People's Republic of China No. 21Effectiveness: EffectiveEffective date: 07-01-2010Category: Tort ( Civil Law->Tort )全文：Full text:中华人民共和国侵权责任法Tort Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国主席令第21号Order of the President of the People's Republic of China No. 212009年12月26日December 26, 2009《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》已由中华人民共和国第十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十二次会议于2009年12月26日通过，现予公布，自2010年7The Tort Law of the People's Republic of China, adopted at the 12th session of the Standing Committee of the 11th National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China on December 26, 2009, is hereby promulgated and shall come into effect on July 1, 2010.月1日起施行。
中华人民共和国主席胡锦涛President of the People's Republic of China Hu Jintao中华人民共和国侵权责任法Tort Law of the People's Republic of China（2009年12月26日第十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十二次会议通过）Adopted at the 12th session of the Standing Committee of the 11th National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China on December 26, 2009目录第一章一般规定第二章责任构成和责任方式第三章不承担责任和减轻责任的情形第四章关于责任主体的特殊规定第五章产品责任第六章机动车交通事故责任第七章医疗损害责任第八章环境污染责任第九章高度危险责任第十章饲养动物损害责任第十一章物件损害责任ContentsChapter I General ProvisionsChapter II Constitutive Requirements of Liability and Methods for Assuming LiabilityChapter III Circumstances under which Liability Is Waived or MitigatedChapter IV Special Provisions on Liable PartiesChapter V Product LiabilityChapter VI Automobile Traffic Accident LiabilityChapter VII Medical Malpractice LiabilityChapter VIII Environmental Pollution LiabilityChapter IX High-Risk Operation LiabilityChapter X Liability for Damage Caused by Domesticated AnimalsChapter XI Liability for Damage Caused by Objects Chapter XII Supplementary Provisions第十二章附则第一章一般规定Chapter I General Provisions第一条为保护民事主体的合法权益，明确侵权责任，预防并制裁侵权行为，促进社会和谐稳定，制定本法。
Article 1 This Law is formulated with a view to protecting the legitimate rights and interests of civil parties, determining liability for torts, preventing and penalizing tortious acts, and promoting social harmony and stability.第二条侵害民事权益，应当依照本法承担侵权责任。
本法所称民事权益，包括生命权、健康权、姓名权、名誉权、荣誉权、肖像权、隐私权、婚姻自主权、监护权、所有权、用益物权、担保物权、著作权、专利权、商标专用权、发现权、股权、继承权等人身、财产权益。
Article 2 Whoever infringes on the civil rights and interests of others shall be liable for the tortious acts in accordance with this Law.For the purpose of this Law, "civil rights and interests" shall include personal and property rights and interests such as the right to life, the right to health, rights associated with names, reputational rights, honorary rights, the right to one's image, the right to privacy, the right to marital autonomy, the right to guardianship, ownership, usufruct, security interests, copyrights, patent rights, exclusive rights to use trademarks, discovery rights, equities, right of succession, etc.第三条被侵权人有权请求侵权人承担侵权责任。
Article 3 Parties whose rights are infringed upon shall be entitled to request the infringing parties be held liable for torts.第四条侵权人因同一行为应当承担行政责任或者刑事责任的，不影响依法承担侵权责任。
Article 4 The assumption of administrative or criminal liability by an infringing party for the same act shall not prejudice its assumption of tortious liability in accordance with the law.Where an infringing party bears tort liability,因同一行为应当承担侵权责任和行政责任、刑事责任，侵权人的财产不足以支付的，先承担侵权责任。
administrative liability and criminal liability for the same act but has insufficient assets to meet all claims made in relation thereto, it shall first assume the tortious liability.第五条其他法律对侵权责任另有特别规定的，依照其规定。
Article 5 Special provisions, if any, prescribed by other laws on tort liability shall prevail.第二章责任构成和责任方式Chapter II Constitutive Requirements of Liability and Methods for Assuming Liability第六条行为人因过错侵害他人民事权益，应当承担侵权责任。
根据法律规定推定行为人有过错，行为人不能证明自己没有过错的，应当承担侵权责任。
Article 6 Whoever is at fault in infringing upon another party's civil rights and interests shall bear tort liability. Whoever is presumed to be at fault by law and is unable to prove otherwise shall bear tort liability.第七条行为人损害他人民事权益，不论行为人有无过错，法律规定应当承担侵权责任的，依照其规定。
Article 7 Whoever infringes upon another party's civil rights and interests and shall bear tort liability by law regardless of whether it is at fault shall be subject to such provisions.第八条二人以上共同实施侵权行为，造成他人损害的，应当承担连带Article 8 Two or more parties whose joint infringement causes damage to another party shall be jointly and severally liable.责任。