法律英语试题优选稿

法律英语试题

集团文件版本号：（M928-T898-M248-WU2669-I2896-DQ586-M1988）

广东外语外贸大学国际商务英语学院“法律英语”2005-2006学年下学期期末考试试卷（A）

考核对象：法律英语系（2004级）考试时间：2小时

班级：学号：姓名：分数：

PartⅠMatch the words and phrases in Column A with the corresponding definitions or relevant information in Column B. (10%)

A B a. assumpsit 1. the addition of labor to the chattel of

another, without the latter’s consent,

which so changes the chattel that the title to

it is transferred to the laborer

b. chattel 2. a writ form a higher court to a lower one

requesting a transcript of the proceedings of a

case for review

c. amicus curiae 3. a legal action to enforce or recover damages

for breach of a simple contract

d. verdict 4. a court order prohibiting a party from a

specific course of action

e. accession 5. an article of personal, movable property

f. injunction 6. to file an indictment with the court before an

accused stands trial

g. acquittal7. friend of the court

h. grand jury8. the deliberate, willful giving of false,

misleading, or incomplete testimony under oath i. certiorari9. the final decision of a jury concerning a

matter of fact submitted to it by the court for

determination

j. unilateral 10. one party’s major evidence and arguments

contract

k. tort11. the state of being found or proved not guilty l. mala in se12. the unlawful appropriation of another’s

property

m. case-in-chief 13. a civil wrong other than a breach of contract or a breach of trust

n. perjury14. a promise is exchanged for an act of

performance

o. conversion15. actions that are intrinsically immoral

p. petit jury16.a written statement charging a party with the

commission of a crime or other offense, drawn

up by a prosecuting attorney and found and

presented by a grand jury .

q. trust17.a system whereby the defense can challenge up

to 3 jurors without giving any reasons.

r.peremptory challenge 18.consisting of twelve citizens duly qualified

to serve on juries, impaneled and sworn to try one or more issues of facts submitted to them and to give a judgment respecting the same,

which is called a verdict.

s. hung jury19.the confidence reposed in a trustee when

giving the trustee legal title to property to

administer for another, together with the

trustee's obligation regarding that property

and the beneficiary

t. indictment20.a jury which is unable to reach a verdict

Part II Translate the following sentences and paragraphs. (30%) 1.(5%) The term "Information" does not include any information

which at the time of disclosure or thereafter is (i)

generally available to or known by the public (other than as

a result of its disclosure by A Company or its

Representatives), (ii) available to A Company on a non-

confidential basis from a source other than the Company or its advisors, or (iii) independently acquired or developed by

A Company without violating any of its obligations under this

Agreement.

2.(5%) “Tort” is an elusive concept. It has defied a number

of attempts to formulate a useful definition. The dilemma is that any definition which is sufficiently comprehensive to encompass all torts is so general as to be almost meaningless.

The one common element of all torts is that someone has sustained a loss or harm as the result of some act or failure to act by another. Virtually all of the infinitely diverse forms of human activity—driving a vehicle, engaging in business, speaking, writing, owning and using real or personal property—may be a source of harm and therefore of tort liability. This diversity of conduct resists broad generalizations, and so does the tort liability on which it is based.

3. (5%) This Agreement is drawn up in English and translated

into Chinese. Each Party acknowledges that notwithstanding the Chinese translation of this Agreement which is also signed by the Parties, in the event there is a conflict,

inconsistency or discrepancy between the Chinese and English text, the latter shall prevail.

4. (3%) 一名成功的出庭律师能够迅速地在行业中脱颖而出，并经司法

大臣任命成为皇家律师。

5. (4%)本协议应受纽约州法律管辖，幷按照纽约州法律进行解释。A公

司在本协议项下的义务应于本协议签署之日起的两年后解除。

6. (4%)如对以上判决不服，可在收到本判决书后次日至第10日期间直接

或通过本庭上诉至最高人民法院。书面申请上诉的，上诉人必须提供上诉书原件一份，复印件二份。

7. (4%) 这是一起原告提起的、对撤销其对被告的盗窃控告的判决的上

诉案。受理后，本庭依法组成了合议庭，公开审判本案，现审理完毕。

Part III

Instructions: In this part of the test, there are 15 questions, all of which are chosen from the texts we have covered in this semester. You are required to choose ONLY 10 out of these 15 questions. Write your brief answers on the ANSWER SHEET. (30%) Unit 9

Questions about Text I The Legal Profession in England

1.How does a barrister’s job differ from a solicitor’s? Questions about Text II The Bar in the United States

2.What are the major work tasks performed by lawyers in the

U.S.

3.

Unit 10

Questions about Text I English Judges

4.Fill in the following table concerning the judicial offices

in England.

Questions about Text II Jury

5.What is the process of the jury selection?

Unit 11

Questions about Text I Crime and Punishment

6.What is the difference between mala in se and mala prohibita? Unit 12

Questions about Text I The Adversary System

7.What duty does the lawyer have according to ethical

requirements of the legal profession?

Questions about Text II The Adversary System and the

Inquisitorial System

8.What are the main differences between the adversary system

and the investigative system Please list at least three of them.

Unit 13

Questions about Text I Government Regulation of Business

9.What is the difference between interstate commerce and

intrastate commerce?

Questions about Text II Means of Dispute Settlement

10.How many types of ADR (alternative dispute resolution) are

mentioned in the text Please list at least five of them. Unit 14

Questions about Text I The Law of Tort

11.What are the differences between a tort and a breach of

contract?

Questions about Text II The Nature of Intellectual Property 12.What is the relation between rights and duties created by

intellectual property?

Unit 15

Questions about Text I The Contract

13.What do termination clauses (remedy clauses, arbitration

clauses, etc.) tend to be concerned with?

Unit 16

Questions about Text I Law Reform: The Case of Britain

14.What are the mechanisms of legal reform in Britain

15.

16.Why is a disinterested commission a better source for the

proposal of legal reform than the unified reforms of the judiciary and the partial reforms advocated by interested parties?

Questions about Text II Law, the Individuals and the Society 17.Why is an entrenched Bill of Rights urgently needed

according to Lord Scarman?

Part IV. Case reading. (30%)

Read the following two cases and answer the questions.

Case I.

CENTRAL LONDON PROPERTY TRUST LIMITED

v.

HIGH TREES HOUSE LIMITED.

[1947] KB 130; [1956] 1 All ER 256 (Note); 62 TLR 557; [1947]

LJR 77; 175 LT 333

Facts：

By a lease under seal dated September 24, 1937, the plaintiff company let to the defendant company (a subsidiary of the plaintiffs) a block of flats for a term of ninety-nine years from September 29, 1937, at a ground rent of ￡2,500 / a year. In the early part of 1940, owing to war conditions then prevailing, only a few of the flats in the block were let to tenants and it became apparent that the defendants would be unable to pay the rent reserved by the lease out of the rents of the flats. Discussions took place between the directors of the two companies, which were closely connected, and, as a result, on January 3, 1940, a letter was written by the plaintiffs to the defendants confirming that the ground rent of the premises would be reduced from ￡2,500 / a year to ￡1,250

l a year as from the beginning of the term. The defendants thereafter paid the reduced rent. By the beginning of 1945 all the flats were let but the defendants continued to pay only the reduced rent. In September, 1945, the plaintiffs wrote to the defendants claiming that rent was payable at the rate of

￡2,500 / a year and, subsequently, in order to determine the legal position, they initiated friendly proceedings in which they claimed the difference between rent at the rates of

￡2,500 l a year and ￡1,250 / a year for the quarters ending September 29 and December 25, 1945. By their defense the defendants pleaded (1) that the letter of January 3, 1940, constituted an agreement that the rent reserved should be

￡1,250l a year only, and that such agreement related to the whole term of the lease, (2) they pleaded in the alternative that the plaintiff company were estopped from alleging that the rent exceeded ￡1,250 per annum and (3) as a further alternative, that by failing to demand rent in excess of

￡1,250l a year before their letter of September 21, 1945 (received by the defendants on September 24), they had waived their rights in respect of any rent, in excess of that at the rate of ￡1,250 l a year, which had accrued up to September 24, 1945.

Judgment (Lord Denning):

I am satisfied on all the evidence that the promise here was that the ground rent should be reduced to ￡1,250 l a year as a temporary expedient while the block of flats was not fully, or substantially fully let, owing to the conditions prevailing. That means that the reduction in the rent applied throughout the years down to the end of 1944, but early in 1945 it is

plain that the flats were fully let, and, indeed the rents received from them, were increased beyond the figure at which

it was originally contemplated that they would be let. At all events the rent from them must have been very considerable. I find that the conditions prevailing at the time when the reduction in rent was made, had completely passed away by the early months of 1945. I am satisfied that the promise was understood by all parties only to apply under the conditions prevailing at the time when it was made, namely, when the flats were only partially let, and that it did not extend any further than that. When the flats became fully let, early in 1945, the reduction ceased to apply.

In those circumstances, under the law as I hold it, it seems to me that rent is payable at the full rate for the quarters ending September 29 and December 25, 1945.

If the case had been one of estoppel, it might be said that in any event the estoppel would cease when the conditions to which the representation applied came to an end, or it also might be said that it would only come to an end on notice. In either case it is only a way of ascertaining what is the scope of the representation. I prefer to apply the principle that a promise intended to be binding, intended to be acted on and in fact acted on, is binding so far as its terms properly apply. Here

it was binding as covering the period down to the early part of 1945, and as from that time full rent is payable. I therefore give judgment for the plaintiff company for the amount claimed. Questions:

1. What are the parties in this dispute fighting about?

2. What is the plaintiff’s claim?

3. What’s the defendant’s defense?

4. What rule does the court articulate in order to solve the parties’ dispute?

5. What does it mean b y “estoppel” Is estoppel established by this court Why or why not

6. What do you think about Lord Denning’s decision What would you have done

7. From what case report books is this case taken On which pages of the different case books can you find this case

Case II.

JONES v. FLOWERS et?al.

certiorari to the supreme court of Arkansas

Argued January 17, 2006--Decided April 26,No. 04-1477. 2006 Facts：

Petitioner Jones continued to pay the mortgage on his Arkansas home after separating from his wife and moving elsewhere in the same city. Once the mortgage was paid off, the property taxes--which had been paid by the mortgage company--went unpaid, and the property was certified as delinquent. Respondent Commissioner of State Lands mailed Jones a certified letter at the property's address, stating that unless he redeemed the property, it would be subject to public sale in two years. Nobody was home to sign for the letter and nobody retrieved it from the post office within 15 days, so it was returned to the Commissioner, marked "unclaimed." Two years later, the Commissioner published a notice of public sale in a local newspaper. No bids were submitted, so the State negotiated a private sale to respondent Flowers. Before selling the house, the

Commissioner mailed another certified letter to Jones, which was also returned unclaimed. Flowers purchased the house and had an unlawful detainer notice delivered to the property. It was served on Jones' daughter, who notified him of the sale.

He filed a state-court suit against respondents, alleging that the Commissioner's failure to provide adequate notice resulted in the taking of his property without due process.

Granting respondents summary judgment, the trial court concluded that Arkansas' tax sale statute, which sets out the notice procedure used here, complied with due process. The State Supreme Court affirmed.

Held:

1.When mailed notice of a tax sale is returned unclaimed, a State must take additional reasonable steps to attempt to provide notice to the property owner before selling his property, if it is practicable to do so..

(a)This Court has deemed notice constitutionally sufficient if it was reasonably calculated to reach the intended recipient when sent, but has never addressed whether due process requires further efforts when the government becomes aware prior to the taking that its notice attempt has failed. Most Courts of

Appeals and State Supreme Courts addressing this question have decided that the government must do more in such a case, and many state statutes require more than mailed notice in the first instance.

(b)The means a State employs to provide notice "must be such as one desirous of actually informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to accomplish it." The adequacy of a particular form of notice is assessed by balancing the State's interest against "the individual interest sought to be protected by the Fourteenth Amendment." Here, the evaluation concerns the adequacy of notice prior to the State's extinguishing a property owner's interest in a home. It is unlikely that a person who actually desired to inform an owner about an impending tax sale of a house would do nothing when a certified letter addressed to the owner is returned unclaimed. The sender would ordinarily attempt to resend the letter, if that is practical, especially given that it concerns the important and irreversible prospect of losing a house. The State may have made a reasonable calculation of how to reach Jones, but it had good reason to suspect when the notice was returned that Jones was no better off than if no notice had been sent. The government must consider unique information

about an intended recipient regardless of whether a statutory scheme is reasonably calculated to provide notice in the ordinary case. None of the Commissioner's additional contentions--that notice was sent to an address that Jones provided and had a legal obligation to keep updated, and that Jones was obliged to ensure that those in whose hands he left his property would alert him if it was in jeopardy--relieves the State of its constitutional obligation to provide adequate notice.

2.Because additional reasonable steps were available to the State, given the circumstances here, the Commissioner's effort to provide notice to Jones was insufficient to satisfy due process. What is reasonable in response to new information depends on what that information reveals. The Commissioner's complaint about the burden of even these additional steps is belied by Arkansas' requirement that notice to homestead owners be accomplished by personal service if certified mail is returned and by the fact that the State transfers the cost of notice to the taxpayer or tax sale purchaser. The Solicitor General's additional arguments--that posted notice could be removed by children or vandals, and that the follow-up requirement will encourage States to favor modes of delivery

that will not generate additional information--are rejected. This Court will not prescribe the form of service that Arkansas should adopt. Arkansas can determine how best to proceed, and the States have taken a variety of approaches.

359 Ark. 443, ___ S.

W. 3d ___, reversed and remanded.

Questions:

1. Name all the disputing parties.

2. What’s the dispute to be resolved by the Supreme Court?

3. Give a brief account of the procedural history of the case.

4. What is the plaintiff complaining about?

5. What defense did the defendant(s) use?

6. What decision does the Supreme Court make What was the

Supreme Court’s reasoning for its decision

7. What do you think about the Supreme Court’s decision?