⑴ tort law and contract law 區別侵權法（tort law）和 合同法（contract law）的區別 急····
侵權法比合同法的范圍要寬的多。比如說A不小心用球砸到了B，B可以告A侵權，因為A的不小心（英國法），再比如，狗仔小報誹謗某明星，這個明星也可以告小報侵權。但是他們之間並沒有訂立合同。合同法只有在有效合同訂立之後，才能有法律效力，而合同雙方的義務也是在合同中的義務，但是受損失方也可以告造成損失方侵權……
總而言之，就是侵權法保護的權利是基本權利，和一般權利（基本法規定的權利），而合同法主要保護的是合同中規定雙方的權利。
⑵ 誰能幫我翻譯英文摘要，，，法律類的
In recent years, as the people's living standard rising, and the overwhelming popularity of various media, speed and impact of the increasingly widespread, a commercial endorsement for the ordinary people of us, now is more often than not, celebrity endorsements have become more frequent proct has Shigu . But current law tort liability for proct spokesmen did not more clearly defined, so that the legitimate rights and interests of consumers also are not protected. Such contradictions have become increasingly prominent, in order to better improve the socialist legal system, while preserving the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. So we have to advocate for tort liability for procts to identify and implement its accountability, improve the existing legal system, legal rights and interests of consumers complete security system, to achieve a harmonious socialist society.
This paper procts infringing procts after the incident, spokesman for the law's lack of accountability for the analysis of research, and explore current issues arising from the legal system and to address these problems, the complete proposals to effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers . In this way, both for the success of building a harmonious society, or whether the realization of the Rule of Law has an important significance.
This article by the present law tort liability for the proct spokesperson and proct endorsements the defect caused by infringement issues and the impact on consumers description of these areas to study the problems arising from proct infringement and voice impact on consumers On the Improvement of the existing consumer protection laws and regulations on the proposal, in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers are not compromised in order to better solve the problem.
⑶ 法律英語翻譯。急！
American tort law of strict liability from the United Kingdom, has now become the mainland legal scholars often use the concept. European countries have been integrated into the principles of tort law system of Liability. In recent years, the scope of strict liability for the widening trend. Strict liability is based on the absolute obligation of security breach, although when it is done to the most careful of people's attention, but any damage caused by their actions and take responsibility. Defense against strict liability is very limited, reasonable care not among them. Strict liability for abnormally dangerous most frequent activity or proct liability cases.
The essential characteristics of strict liability
(A) the fault of the non-strict liability
Strict liability is undoubtedly the responsibility of following the fault which occurred after a new milestone. It is the advent of the fault is to determine the factors responsible is no longer the ultimate basis for liability, which is concive to protecting the innocent victims and vulnerable groups.
(B) the risk of strict liability
Looking at national tort law, strict liability and risk are inevitably linked. German civil law countries, said strict liability for hazardous ty. Some scholars would risk liability and strict liability common law equivalent. Similarly in France the use of a dangerous activity as the basis of strict liability. [20] but in fact Anglo-American tort law, strict liability apply to animals in addition to causing the infringement, workers compensation, proct liability, the most unusual is for harm caused by hazardous activities.
(C) Strict Liability of
Offenders in their fault liability for damage arising in, the reason is because the liability of the perpetrator can be a moral disapproval of. However, the perpetrator of strict liability without fault, will still be liable, the attribution of the basis for intriguing. The western half of the 20th century's most influential jurists of Pond from the maintenance of social security obligations generally off, demonstrates the rationality of strict liability. He believes that since the late 19th century, the legal interests of the community rather than focus on the protection of personal interests.
(D) strict liability causality
Responsibility for the fault is the fault element of the final decision is to determine whether the establishment of the key fault liability. In the composition of the elements of strict liability, regardless of whether the offender's fault. Therefore, the causal relationship has more significance, it is the ultimate constituent elements of strict liability element. Strict liability in the causation and damage are only two elements, namely, proof of causation by the plaintiff as long as the damage to these two factors and can get relief.
(E) of strict liability Juzheng
Strict liability is based on the absolute security breach of its obligations, regardless of whether the defendant to do the ty of care to the most cautious, as long as it should be responsible for the damage occurred, if the defendant can not be reasonable to defense (and defense is very limited), you can not remove responsibility, that is part of the plaintiff's burden of proof shifted to the defendant, the plaintiff only to prove causation and damage had been sufficient.
(F) defense of strict liability in the Restrictive
1, the third behavior, animal behavior and the forces of nature cause damage can not be the defenses.
2, the victim can not be the fault of defense.
3, the victims of people, things and animals, abnormal sensitivity can be used as defense.
4, the performance of public ties as defense.
Comment on the strict liability
(A) availability: American tort law is rooted in the philosophy of pragmatism in the soil, advocating people-centered, knowledge and human experience claims can not be separated, emphasizing the unity of theory and practice. On this basis, the case law system is the empirical wisdom of judges and logical reasoning with the proct. The strict liability from the case law through evolution, widening the scope of its application, this fact itself proves the rule dynamic and practical.
(B) Transcendence: whether scholars have the responsibility of strict liability is equivalent to what different opinions, but no doubt that it goes beyond the French law "presumption of fault liability" and the German law, "dangerous ty," and broke through to abstract known for speculative and logically coherent system of civil law tort theory of barriers to a unified system to a al responsibility principle or the principle of diversity attributable to system development, and thus the world had a profound influence legislation.
(C) justice: perpetrators and victims of strict liability emphasized to achieve a balance of interests, reflecting the protection of the weak instead of the new concept of equal protection, and to achieve substantial justice. This is in the field of proct liability and workers compensation in particular stands out.
要懸賞分呀！
⑷ 跪求大神翻譯一段英文，高分啊！！！
自己去網路 翻譯
問題一請識別和評估任何可能的侵權行為，針對指定的個人或實體，包括任何合理的防禦和適當的補救措施，我國侵權法下，完全基於我們在本課程的討論。在你的分析的每一步，以侵權責任法或其他法律或司法解釋的相關文章。請描述成本，任何指定的受害者將面臨和程序，將為他們倡導和追求在中國侵權訴訟。問題二請識別和評估任何可能的侵權行為，針對指定的個人或實體，包括任何合理的防禦和適當的補救措施，在侵權法在美國，僅僅基於我們在本課程的討論。請描述一下成本，任何指定的受害者將面臨和程序，將為他們倡導和追求一個在美國的侵權行為
⑸ 法律英語的翻譯，「受委託人」怎麼譯成英語謝謝！
trustee 是受委託人
⑹ 簡述美國法中侵權責任的基本原則
在美國，侵權法主要屬於各州的法律范疇，而且主要由判例法組成。在聯邦法律中1946年的Federal Tort Claims Act (聯邦侵權索賠法）是最主要的一個法律。
侵權行為可分為故意侵權行為（intentional tort)、過失侵權行為（negligence or negligent tort)和嚴格責任侵權行為 (strict liability tort). 對侵權行為的一般救濟方法是對侵權行為所造成的損害予以一定的金錢補償，在涉及交通事故等領域的侵權賠償則廣范採用保險賠償的方式。
侵權法的原則簡單有：
1、每個人都要對其侵權行為承擔責任，在有限的形式下兒童亦然（但是，父母僅當其作為該兒童之代理人或未能按照其監護義務行事時才負此責任），但國家不在此例，除非法律明確規定取消了國家的豁免權。
2、每個人包括新生兒都受到侵權法的保護。 當其被繼承人或近親屬被故意或過失導致死亡時（非正常死亡之訴），繼承人或近親屬可以提起損害賠償之訴。
3、過失侵權責任以過失行為和對人身或財產的侵害之間的因果關系為前提要件。一個人若沒有盡到其注意義務就被認為是有過失的。
⑺ 哪位有美國法法條（中英文）
Law of the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The law of the United States was originally largely derived from the common law system of English law, which was in force at the time of the Revolutionary War.[1] However, the supreme law of the land is the United States Constitution and, under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, laws enacted by Congress and treaties to which the U.S. is a party. These form the basis for federal laws under the federal constitution in the United States, circumscribing the boundaries of the jurisdiction of federal law and the laws in the fifty U.S. states and in the territories.
Contents [hide]
1 General overview
1.1 Sources of law
1.2 American common law
2 Federal law
3 State law
3.1 Criminal law
3.2 Criminal procere
3.3 Civil procere
3.4 Contract law
3.5 Tort law
3.6 Attempts at "uniform" laws
4 Local law
5 Odd exceptions
6 See also
6.1 Lists
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links
美國法律
維基網路，自由的網路全書
美國法律源自美國獨立戰爭時期的英國普通法體系，只是在最高權力條款規定下，美國憲法、國會制定的其他法律和美國參與的國際條約是國家的最高法律。這些文件組成了聯邦制下聯邦法律的基礎，確定了聯邦、五十個州與海外領地的法律許可權。
目錄 [隱藏]
1 總覽
1.1 法律淵源
1.2 美國普通法
2 聯邦法律
3 州法
3.1 刑法
3.2 侵權法
3.3 「統一」法律的嘗試
4 地方法
5 稀奇古怪的例外
6 參見
6.1 列表
7 外部鏈接
8 注釋
註：網路不允許加維基網路的網址，你自己去查一下好了，上面是部分內容。
⑻ 幫忙翻譯成英語 謝謝
如果說美國侵權法上的懲罰性賠償制度改革是個「解構」的過程，那麼中國侵權法上的懲罰性賠償制度則是一個「建構」問題。中國侵權法上是否需要引進懲罰性賠償制度？如果回答是肯定的，該如何進行制度設計？中國侵權法又能從美國侵權法改革運動中獲得哪些啟示呢？
If the United States tort law on the punitive compensation system reform is a "Deconstruction " process, then the Chinese Tort Law on the system of punitive damages is a " construction" problem. Tort law of China on whether to introce the punitive compensation system? If the answer is yes, how to design the system? Tort law of China but also from the American tort reform movement derive what enlightenment?
中國現行法上的懲罰性賠償制度主要存在於合同法領域,其典型立法例有三：一是鼎鼎大名的《消費者權益保護法》的第49條，規定「經營者提供商品或服務有欺詐行為的,應當按照消費者的要求增加賠償其受到的損失,增加賠償的金額為消費者購買商品的價款或接受服務的費用的一倍」。二是《合同法》第89條的「定金罰則」，規定「收受定金的一方不履行約定的債務的,應當雙倍返還定金」。三是最高人民法院頒布的《關於審理商品房買賣合同糾紛案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》的第8條、第9條和第14條第2款，分別就商品房出賣人「一屋多買」、提供虛假信息、建築面積誤差等問題，規定了「不超過已付購房款一倍的賠償」或「雙倍返還」的賠償責任。在侵權法領域，除了產品責任以外[54]，並無懲罰性賠償制度的適用。
China's current law on the punitive compensation system exists mainly in the field of contract law and its typical legislation has three: one is a great reputation in the "consumer protection law" provisions of the forty-ninth, "operator providing goods or services fraud, consumers should be in accordance with the requirements for additional compensation for the losses incurred, the increased amount of the compensations for consumers to purchase the commodity price or accept service costs double ." Two is the "contract law" article eighty-ninth" earnest money "," accepting the deposit of one party fails to perform the agreed debt, it should be double the return of deposit ." Three was enacted by the Supreme People's Court on the trial of" commercial housing sales contracts dispute case applicable legal interpretation" of the eighth, ninth and fourteenth paragraph 2, respectively on the real estate seller "a house to buy ", providing false information, construction area of error problem, provides " no more than paid the purchase of a times the compensation " or "double return" the liability for compensation. In the field of tort law, in addition to proct liability, there is no punitive damages system.
雖然全國人大法工委主持起草的《侵權責任法》草案中並沒有關於懲罰性賠償制度的規定，但是目前學術界主要的四個草案均不同程度的在侵權法中引入了懲罰性賠償制度：中國社會科學院法學研究所梁慧星教授主持的草案（以下簡稱「梁慧星」草案）和廈門大學麻昌華教授編寫的草案（以下簡稱「麻昌華」草案），規定了對故意侵權行為適用懲罰性賠償；[55]中國人民大學王利明教授主持的草案（以下簡稱「王利明」草案）和楊立新教授主持的草案（以下簡稱「楊立新」草案），則規定僅在產品侵權責任或證券侵權責任場合適用懲罰性賠償責任。
Although the NPC Law Committee presided over the drafting of the" tort liability law" draft and not on the punitive damages system regulation, but the academic circles at present mainly four draft are in different levels of tort law is introced in the system of punitive damages : Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Professor Liang Huixing presided over the draft ( hereinafter referred to as the "Liang Huixing " the draft ) and the Xiamen University Ma professor Chang Hua prepared draft ( hereinafter referred to as " Ma Chang Hua" draft), provides for intentional torts punitive damages ; Renmin University of China professor Wang Liming presided over the draft ( hereinafter referred to as the "Wang Liming " of the draft ) and Professor Yang Lixin presided over the draft ( hereinafter referred to as the "Yang Lixin " of the draft ), set in only proct liability or tort liability of securities occasions punitive damages responsibility.
與美國侵權法改革中的遭遇相比，懲罰性賠償制度在中國侵權法學界受到的更多的歡迎和追捧。從本文前述可知，盡管懲罰性賠償制度在美國受到各州制定法的種種限制，但由於其具備強力的懲罰、震懾和預防功能，在美國侵權法上仍具有十分重要的地位。因此，中國侵權法引入懲罰性賠償制度，不失為一種明智的選擇。但是在立法理念上，不應大開「方便之門」、降低懲罰性賠償的進入門檻，以防「王海現象」的死灰復燃。所以筆者認為，在制度設計上，仍要吸取美國侵權法改革的經驗教訓，一方面限制懲罰性賠償制度的適用，制定相對嚴格的成立要件；另一方面，可參照原告所獲得的填補性損害賠償金，對懲罰性賠償金額設定最高上限。這樣一來，在國內五個侵權責任法草案中，「梁慧星」草案將適用條件嚴格限於「故意侵害他人生命、身體、健康或具有感情意義財產」之情形，將賠償金數額上控制在「不超過（填補性損害）賠償金3倍」之范圍內，尺度拿捏得當，顯得尤為嚴謹合理。
Comparing to the American tort reform in the encounter, the punitive damages system in Chinese tort law is more popular and sought after. From this paper the knowable, although the system of punitive damages in the United States by state law restrictions, but because of the strong punishment and deterrence and prevention function in American tort law still has a very important position. Therefore, China's tort law to introce the punitive damages system, can be regarded as a wise choice. But the legislation conception, should not be big " convenient ways " to rece the punitive damages to enter a doorsill, to prevent the " Wang Hai phenomenon" a stirring among the dry bones. So the author thinks, in the system design, still should draw lessons from the experience of the reform of American tort law, a limit punitive damages system developed relatively strict requirements ; on the other hand, may refer to the plaintiff the fill of compensation for punitive damages to set a maximum limit. As a result, in five a draft law on tort liability, "Liang Huixing " the draft will be the applicable condition is strictly limited to "deliberate infringement of life, body, health or emotional meaning property " of the situation, the amount of compensation control in "no more than ( fill damage ) damages of 3 times within the scope of scale to handle properly, is very rigorous and reasonable.
⑼ 美國侵權法和合同法的主要特點各是什麼
給你提供個網站： www.questia.com/search ，用英語翻譯好了再上面一查就知道了。另外奉勸一句，財大回就這答個課最愁人，以後告訴師弟師妹們不要選。