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 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。很多因素造成了这一现象：（a）在美国民事诉讼案件中的原告通常利用法律赋予他的诉讼权利主张赔偿，因为陪审团更多的是基于可以理解的人性考虑而非法律考虑，例如当一个孩子在一起交通事故或因购买大公司的瑕疵产品而受到伤害往往能得到陪审团的同情理解。（b）补偿费和损害赔偿金不仅包括实际的损害而且包括了无形损害。原告经常可以利用陪审团的人性反应：比如，当永久的失去肢体时怎样才算是一个适当的赔偿金额。（c）美国法律允许律师分享原告所获得的赔偿金（胜诉酬金）。这种酬金达到法院判付赔偿金金额的百分之二十五到百分之三十的情况并非罕见。由于以上所有因素的存在，在侵权案件中若想获得巨额的赔偿金必将经历一个冗长的审判过程。这方面的一个例子是在陪审团对一个重大的侵权案件做出裁决后，专家（证人）的酬金可能是“渺小”的原告所获得的损害赔偿金的全部。陪审团做出一个超过100，000美元的裁决已不再是不可能的，而是极其常见的。这些因素都将成为若干改革努力的试金石，我们将在下文中更多的讨论其细节。
2. Tort law and the law of contracts often overlap since an injured party frequently has the choice between a tort claim(for instance, unauthorized use of property--conversion--or personal injury)and a suit in contract, for instance, in implied contract or, in the case of personal injuries, for breach of warranty. Since the law of torts permits the recovery of intangible damage (which is usually not the case with respect to contract claims), the plaintiff will ordinarily choose the tort claim for personal injuries when the facts so permit.
侵权行为法常常与合同法产生竞合，受损害的一方也常常在侵权之诉（例如将未经授权使用的财产转移和因非法占有他人财产所造成的个人损害）和违约之诉中做出选择。比如，在格式合同及在个人损害赔偿案件中或因为违反保证诺言的案例中。因为侵权行为法还将赔偿无形损失（而违约责任往往不赔偿无形的损失），因为侵权行为法如此的规定，在现实生活中原告往往选择它提起个人损害赔偿。
3. Everyone is liable for his tortious act, in limited form also children (however, parents only then when they acted as the child’s agent or did not comply with their duty to supervise), but not the state unless express statutory provision has abolished state immunity.
每个人都要对其侵权行为承担责任，在有限的形式下儿童亦然（但是，父母仅当其作为该儿童之代理人或未能按照其监护义务行事时才负此责任），但国家不在此例，除非法律明确规定取消了国家的豁免权。
4. Everyone is protected against tortious acts, including the embryo. The heirs or next of kin may have a damage claim for the intentional or negligent death of their relative or testator (wrongful death action).The statutes of some States provide protection, and a tort claim, to third parties for injuries arising out of the intoxication of the tortfeasor; under these so-called "dram-shop acts", a party injured as a result of
the intoxication of the tortfeasor has a claim against him who contributed to the tortfeasor's intoxication.
每个人包括婴儿都受到侵权法的保护。继承人或近亲属可以提起损害赔偿之诉，当其被继承人或近亲属被故意或过失导致死亡时（非正常死亡之诉）。一些州的法律规定，对于第三方的行为使侵权行为人醉酒从而导致受害人受伤的可以提起侵权之诉，这些规定被称为“小酒店法令”，作为侵权行为人醉酒之结果而受到伤害的一方有权向那些造成该侵权行为人醉酒的人提出索赔请求。
5. Finally it should be emphasized again that the law of torts is, in the main, State Law.
最后需要强调的是侵权行为法主要是各州的立法。
Part Two: Intentional Torts 故意侵权
The case law contains the usual catalogue of intentional torts. For instance: battery, assault, conversion of property, false imprisonment, trespass to personal and real property. Some torts, for instance, alienation of affection have been abolished by statute in many States. Others, such as defamation, have recently been modified significantly through constitutional case law. New torts, unknown to the traditional common law, have also been introduced by the case law; particularly important among them are the torts for invasion of privacy and for products liability.
以往的判例包含了各类故意侵权。例如殴打、故意伤害、非法占有他人财产、非法拘禁和对动产和不动产权的侵犯。一些侵权行为，例如破坏他人夫妻关系在很多的州的法律中都被废除了。另外一些，例如诽谤，最近就在宪法判例法中得到显著的修改。判例法也增加了一些传统的普通法所未包含的新的侵权行为；其中特别重要的是侵犯隐私权的行为和产品责任侵权行为。
Part Three: Liability for Negligence 过失侵权责任
Tort liability for negligence presupposes causality between the negligent act and the injury to person or property. A person is negligent if he has not complied with his "duty of care" and, seen objectively, has not acted as "a reasonable and prudent man." The latter test takes into account the special professional qualification of the tortfeasor. Thus, different criteria apply, say, to an architect than for a construction worker, the case law has given a restrictive interpretation to the concept of "duty of care”. The duty must be owed toward the particular plaintiff: there is no duty of care to the public at large. Thus, a lesser duty of care is owed to him who trespasses on property than to an incited guest. Some State statutes go even further and exclude, for instance, a duty of care by the driver of a motor vehicle--toward passengers whom he transports gratuitously (guest statutes). Even if a duty of care exists and has not been observed, the injured party may still not have a claim for compensation. This will be the case, for instance, when he has been guilty
of contributory. This will be the case, for instance, when he has been guilty of contributory negligence or has assumed the rise, the harshness of the contributory negligence defense, the result of which would not only be a deduction from the compensation but exclude any liability on the part of the tortfeasor has been softened in some States by adoption of the "comparative negligence" doctrine. It requires that the respective degree of negligence of both parties be determined and compensation assessed accordingly. The bar of the contributory negligence defense to a recovery may furthermore be excluded by the doctrine of the "last clear chance", according to which even the contributory negligent plaintiff will be compensated if he can prove that the defendant had the "last clear chance" to prevent the damage.
过失侵权责任以过失行为和对人身或财产的侵害之间的因果关系为前提要件。一个人若没有尽到其注意义务就被认为是有过失的。客观地讲，他没有像一个理性且谨慎的人那样行为。最新的修正案中包含了特殊行业侵权行为所该承担的责任。这样，比方说对一名建筑师就要适用不同于一名建筑工人的标准。判例法已经对“注意义务”给出了限制性解释。这种责任必定属于特殊的原告而非普通的社会大众。这样，一个人对于非法进入其土地者所负有的照看义务就小于其邀请的客人。一些州的侵权立法发展得更加迅速，例如，对于免费搭乘乘客的司机的照看义务做出了规定。即使司机未尽到小心与观察的义务，受害一方仍不能主张赔偿请求。下面就是一个因共同过失或承担风险而获罪的案例。共同过失辩护的严格性，其结果并不是减少赔偿数额而是完全排除侵权行为人的责任，已经因一些州采用了“比较过失”原则而得到减弱。比较过失原则又可译为相对过失原则，即通过比较双方的过失来确定双方的责任。该原则要求共同过失的双方基于造成的损害程度来确定赔偿数额。该法令的贡献在于过失侵权的赔偿责任可能因为“最后明显机会”原则得到排除，有过失的原告可能得到赔偿，如果它能够证明被告因“最后明显机会”原则而避免损害。
The extraordinarily complex law of negligence--with its difficulties of proof in a jury trial and the possibility that a jury sympathetic to the plaintiff will let him win despite his contributory negligence but consider the latter in its calculation of damages--today leads to two, sometimes inconsistent, efforts of reform. One would provide for strict liability in many cases, the other would introduce a system of compensation for the injured without regard to fault, resembling a form of insurance. The following section briefly reviews these two trends.
过失侵权法极其复杂，因为在庭审过程中很难避免陪审团对原告产生同情从而不考虑原告的过错也不考虑接下来的损失计算。如今对此现象可以从两方面努力进行改革，尽管有时这两者不相一致。一方面可以在很多案件中规定严格责任，另一方面可以创设一种不考虑过错的赔偿制度，例如类似保险制度的形式。下面的章节将简要评论这两种立法趋势。
Part Four: Tort Law Reform: Strict Liability and “No-Fault”
侵权法改革：严格责任和无过错责任
a. Strict Liability 严格责任
Originally, strict liability existed only in a few special cases, for instance with respect to the maintenance of dangerous animals, defamation, and by way of a rebuttable presumption, known as the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which deduced fault or negligence from the nature of the thing or act itself, such as defective construction or negligent use.
首先，严格责任只存在于几种特殊情形，比如饲养危险动物、诽谤，通过一个被称之为“不言自明法则”的可反驳之推定，从事实或行为本身的性质推定过错或者过失，例如施工缺陷或者是疏忽使用。
Beginning with the use of contract law concepts, particularly that of warranty which permits suit either based on contract or on tort and thus obvious the need to show negligence, the more recent case law recognizes strict liability in the area of product liability. This new tort claim no longer derives from contract law notions but has become independent; the liability of a seller today extends to all "dangerous products”, without regard to whether the issue concerns the product itself or its packaging.” Dangerous products” include products” in a defective condition” which are "unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer or to his property”, In this context," defective" means that the product does not meet the reasonable expectations of the ordinary consumer concerning the safety of the product. Everyone is protected whom the seller "should expect to be endangered by the product's probable use”. In view of the extensive interstate commerce in the United States, this formula, for all practical purposes, extends protection to the public in general.
从合同法概念的作用说起，尤其是在合同或侵权中提供担保可以避免出现过失，更多的近期判例法承认在产品责任领域的严格责任。这一新的侵权主张不再依据合同法主张从而独立存在：销售商的责任如今扩大到所有“危险产品”，而不在乎是产品本身的问题还是包装问题。“危险产品”包括产品“在有缺陷的条件”下对使用者或消费者或其财产有不合理的危险。在此，“缺陷”一词意指该产品未达到一般消费者关于该产品安全性能的合理期望标准。销售商“应该预见到会由于对该产品的恰当使用而带来危险的”每一个人均受保护。纵观美国各州，在所有现实目的中这个定律总体扩大了对社会公众的保护。
b. No-Fault 无过错责任
The trend to strict liability in the area of products liability should be contrasted with another reform endeavor which seeks to find more just solutions for ordinary claims based on negligence, particularly with respect to the great number of automobile accidents. These reform endeavors which are based, in the main, on the plan of Professors Keeton and O'Connell seek to abolish the fault principle in tort law and to award
compensation without proof of fault according to insurance principles. This notion has already proved very successful in those States which so far have adopted No Fault statutes. Experience in those jurisdictions shows persons could be compensated. Nevertheless, compensation for losses resulting from automobile accidents and products liability remains a problem of overwhelming dimensions: losses amount to over five billion dollars a year but only 800 million dollars in insurance proceeds are available for their compensation. As claims arising out of products liability have steadily increased, the cost of liability insurance to manufacturers also increased from 25 million in 1950 to 125 million in 1970. Further reform movements, albeit at this time only in their infancy, seek to extend the No-Fault principle to almost all claims, principally to products liability, but also to other kinds of liability such as medical malpractice. In a No-Fault system, a manufacturer agrees--and insures himself accordingly to grant compensation for certain injuries without proof of fault. "Compensation” in this context means compensation for actual losses, but not for intangible damage. Thus, liability will be limited for the manufacturer and will therefore require a relatively lesser insurance premium to cover the rise. On the other hand, the injured person will be in a better positon, compared to traditional tort law, since he will be entitled to receive immediate compensation for his actual loss (expenses loss of profits or wages) without lengthy litigation or difficult proof of fault.
产品责任适用严格责任的趋势应当与另外一种改革努力相比较，就是为了因过失提起的主张，特别是大量的机动车事故，力求寻找更多解决措施。这些主要建立在基顿和奥康内尔两位教授之方案基础上的改革努力试图取消侵权法中的过错责任原则并按照保险原则在不要过错证明（“无过错”）的情况下给予与赔偿。在目前采用无过错责任制度的国家，已经证明了这一主张非常成功。司法实践表明，当很大部分受害者能得到赔偿时可以降低保险费。然而，机动车事故和产品责任引起的损害赔偿仍然是压倒性多数的严重问题。每年超过50亿美元的损失数额却只有8亿美元保险收益可以用来赔偿。鉴于因产品责任引起的侵权主张稳定增长，生产者的保险责任花费（保险费）也从1950年的2500万美元增加到1970年的1.25亿美元。进一步的改革运动，尽管目前只在初步阶段，试图将无过错责任原则扩大到几乎所有的诉求，主要是产品责任，但是也包括其他的责任，例如医疗事故。在无过错责任体系中，生产者同意并且据此保证其自身在某些伤害中无须证明过错而承认赔偿。在此“赔偿”意指实际损失赔偿，而不包括无形的损害。因此，生产者的责任将会受到限制，这样就要求相对较少的保险费以涵盖这种风险。另一方面，相较传统的侵权法，受害者能处于更有利的地位，因为其有权因其实际损失（花费、收益损失或者薪资）取得立即赔偿，而不用通过长时间的诉讼，也没有证明过错的困难。
Part Two： Apportionment of Liability（Rule Sections）第二部分：责任分担
第一题：比较责任的基本规则Topic 1- Basic Rules of Comparative
Responsibility
1 Issues and Causes of Action Addressed by This Restatement
第一条本重述所涉及的问题与诉因
This Restatement addresses issues of apportioning liability among two or more persons. It applies to all claims[3] （including lawsuits and settlements） for death, personal injury （including emotional distress or consortium）, or physical damage to tangible property, regardless of the basis of liability.
本重述讨论在两位或多位责任人之间分配责任的问题。本重述适用于关于死亡、人身损害[2]（包括精神损害或配偶权），或对有形财产的物理伤害的所有主张（包括法律诉讼与和解），无论其责任基础如何。
2 Contractual Limitations on Liability第二条责任的合同性限制
When permitted by contract law, substantive law governing the claim, and applicable rules of construction, a contract between the plaintiff and another person absolving the person from liability for future harm bars the plaintiff,s recovery[4] from that person for the harm. Unlike a plaintiff,s negligence, a valid contractual limitation on liability does not provide an occasion for the factfinder to assign a percentage of responsibility to any party or other person.
在合同法、诉讼请求的实体法规则和可适用的解释规则允许的情况下，原告与他人之间免除该他人对未来伤害负责的合同，将阻碍原告从该他人处获得对该伤害的赔偿。与原告的过失不同，一项有效的合同性责任限制并不构成事实调查人向任何当事人或他人分配责任份额的理由。
3 Ameliorative Doctrines for Defining Plaintiff’s Negligence Abolished 第三条定义原告过失的各种严格学说均已被废止
Plaintiff,s negligence is defined by the applicable standard for a defendant,s negligence. Special ameliorative doctrines for defining plaintiff,s negligence are abolished.
原告的过失应依据适用于被告过失的标准来定义。特别适用于定义原告过失的各种严格学说均已被废止。
4 Proof of Plaintiff’s Negligence and Legal Causation
The defendant has the burden to prove plaintiff,s negligence, and may use any of the methods a plaintiff may use to prove defendant,s negligence. Except as otherwise provided in Topic 5, the defendant also has the burden to prove that the plaintiff,s negligence, if any, was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s damages.
第四条对原告过失和法律原因的证明
被告负有证明原告过失的举证责任，并可采用原告为证明被告过失可以采用的任何方法。除本重述第五题另有规定外，被告亦负有举证责任证明原告过失——如
果原告存在任何过失——构成原告所受损害的一项法律原因。
5 Negligence Imputed to a Plaintiff第五条可归责于原告的过失
The negligence of another person is imputed to a plaintiff whenever the negligence of the other person would have been imputed had the plaintiff been a defendant, except the negligence of another person is not imputed to a plaintiff solely because of the plaintiff,s ownership of a motor vehicle or permission for its use by the other person.
假设原告是被告的角色，他人的过失便可以归责于他的话，那么该他人的过失可归责于原告。除非该他人的过失不是仅仅因为原告对机动车享有的所有权，或对该他人使用该机动车的许可而归责于原告。
6 Negligence Imputed to a Plaintiff When the Plaintiff,s Recovery Derives from a Claim That the Defendant Committed a Tort Against a Third Person and in Claims Under Survival Statutes
第六条当原告获得的赔偿派生于一项被告对第三人实施了侵权行为的主张和包含于基于遗存诉因法的主张时，过失可归责于原告
（a） When a plaintiff asserts a claim that derives from the defendant,s tort against a third person, negligence of the third person is imputed to the plaintiff with respect to that claim. The plaintiff,s recovery is also reduced by the plaintiff,s own negligence.
（b） The negligence of an estate,s decedent affects the estate[8],s recovery under a survival statute to the same extent that it would have affected the decedent,s recovery had the decedent survived. The negligence of a beneficiary of the decedent,s estate is not imputed to the estate merely because of the beneficiary,s status as a beneficiary. （a）当原告声称一项派生于被告对第三人实施侵权行为的主张时，在该项主张中该第三人的过失可归责于原告。原告的赔偿额同样因为其自身的过失而被减少。
（b）根据遗存诉因法，遗产被继承人[7]（生前）的过失在其生存时对其赔偿额影响的同样范围内，影响遗产可获得的赔偿额。遗产受益人的过失不能仅仅因为受益人作为受益人的法律地位而归责于财产。
7 Effect of Plaintiff’s Negligence When Plaintiff Suffers an Indivisible Injury
第七条在原告遭受不可分损害时原告过失[9]的效力
Plaintiff,s negligence （or the negligence of another person for whose negligence the plaintiff is responsible） that is a legal cause of an indivisible injury to the plaintiff reduces the plaintiff,s recovery in proportion to the share of responsibility the factfinder assigns to the plaintiff （or other person for whose negligence the plaintiff is responsible）.
若原告的过失（或原告应为其过失负责的其他人的过失）构成原告遭受的不可分伤害的一项法律原因，则原告的所获得的赔偿额将依据事实调查人分配给原告（或原告应为其过失负责的该他人）的责任份额相应比例地减少。
8 Factors for Assigning Shares of Responsibility第八条分配责任份额时应考虑的因素
Factors for assigning percentages of responsibility to each person whose legal responsibility has been established include
（a） the nature of the person,s risk-creating conduct, including any awareness or indifference with respect to the risks created by the conduct and any intent with respect to the harm created by the conduct； and （b）the strength of the causal connection between the person,s risk-creating conduct and the harm.
向法律责任已被确定的各方分配责任百分比时应考虑的因素包括：
（a）该方造成风险之行为的性质，包括任何对该行为所造成风险的认识或漠视，以及任何对该行为所造成伤害的意图；及
（b）该方造成风险之行为与该伤害之间因果关系的强度。
9 Offsetting Judgments第九条判决的抵销
If two parties are liable to each other in the same suit, each party is entitled to a setoff of any recovery owed by the other party, except that, in cases in which one or both of the parties has liability insurance, setoff does not reduce the payment of a liability insurer unless an applicable rule of law or statute[10] so provides.
如果同一诉讼中的双方当事人都相互负有责任，那么各方都有权抵消对方享有的任何（相应）赔偿额；除非一方或双方都有责任保险，那么抵消不会减少责任保险人应支付的金额，适用的法律规范或制定法另有规定的除外。
Topic 2- Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm
第二题：数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任
10 Effect of Joint and Several Liability第十条连带责任的效力
When, under applicable law, some persons are jointly and severally liable to an injured person, the injured person may sue for and recover the full amount of recoverable damages from any jointly and severally liable person.
当依据适用的法律，有多人对某一受害人承担连带责任时，该受害人可以起诉任一负连带责任者并从该人处获得可获得的全部损害赔偿[12]。
11 Effect of Several Liability第十一条单独责任的效力
When, under applicable law, a person is severally liable to an injured person for an indivisible injury, the injured person may recover only the severally liable person,s comparative-responsibility share of the injured person,s damages.
当依据适用的法律，某人对受害人的不可分损害承担单独责任时，该受害人仅可以获得该负单独责任者在该受害人应得赔偿额中的比较责任份额。
12 Intentional Tortfeasors第十二条故意侵权行为人
Each person who commits a tort that requires intent is jointly and severally liable for any indivisible injury legally caused by the tortious conduct.
每个实施以故意为要件的侵权行为的人，均应对该侵权行为作为法律原因造成的任何不可分损害承担连带责任。
13 Vicarious Liability第十三条替代责任
A person whose liability is imputed based on the tortious acts of another is liable for the entire share of comparative responsibility assigned to the other, regardless of whether joint and several liability or several liability is the governing rule for independent tortfeasors who cause an indivisible injury.
无论对导致不可分损害的独立侵权行为人适用的规则是连带责任或者单独责任，基于他人侵权性的行为而承担责任的人，对分配给该他人的整个比较责任份额承担责任。
14 Tortfeasors Liable for Failure to Protect the Plaintiff from the Specific Risk of an Intentional Tort
第十四条未就某一故意侵权行为的具体风险对原告提供保护而承担责任的侵权行为人
A person who is liable to another based on a failure to protect the other from the specific risk of an intentional tort is jointly and severally liable for the share of comparative responsibility assigned to the intentional tortfeasor in addition to the share of comparative responsibility assigned to the person.
因未就某一故意侵权行为的具体风险对他人提供保护而承担责任的一方，应在分配给他的比较责任份额之外，对分配给故意侵权行为人的比较责任份额承担连带责任。
15 Persons Acting in Concert第十五条共同行为人
When persons are liable because they acted in concert, all persons are jointly and severally liable for the share of comparative responsibility assigned to each person engaged in concerted activity.
当多人因共同行为而承担责任时，所有各方应对分配给参与该共同行为的每一方的比较责任份额承担连带责任。
16 Effect of Partial Settlement on Jointly and Severally Liable Tortfeasors’ Liability
第十六条对连带责任人之责任所做部分和解的效力
The plaintiff,s recoverable damages from a jointly and severally liable tortfeasor are reduced by the comparative share of damages attributable to a settling tortfeasor who otherwise would have been liable for contribution to jointly and severally liable defendants who do not settle. The settling tortfeasor,s comparative share of damages is the percentage of comparative responsibility assigned to the settling tortfeasor multiplied by the total damages of the plaintiff.
原告可从一负连带责任的侵权行为人处获得的赔偿应减去应分配给另一已和解，否则将对负连带责任的其他未和解被告承担分摊责任的侵权行为人的比较赔偿份额。该已和解侵权行为人的比较赔偿份额是分配给该已和解侵权行为人的比较责任份额与原告赔偿总额的乘积。
17 Joint and Several or Several Liability for Independent Tortfeasors 第十七条独立侵权行为人的连带责任或单独责任
If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, the law of the applicable jurisdiction determines whether those persons are jointly and severally
如有两人或多人的独立侵权行为构成某一不可分损害的法律原因，将由该案司法管辖区的法律确定这些侵权人应否承担连带责任、单独责任或连带责任与单独责任的某种混合责任形态。
liable, severally liable, or liable under some hybrid of joint and several and several liability.
Track A - Joint and Several Liability路径A：连带责任
A18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm
If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each person is jointly and severally liable for the recoverable damages caused by the tortious conduct.
A路径第18条数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任
如果两个或两个以上的共同侵权行为构成一不可分损害的法律原因，那么每个人均对该侵权行为造成的可获得损害赔偿承担连带责任。
A19 Assignment of Responsibility: Jointly and Severally Liable Defendants If one defendant and at least one other party or settling tortfeasor may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each such party and settling tortfeasor is submitted to the factfinder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
A路径第19条责任分配：负连带责任的被告
如果一个被告和至少另一方当事人或者和解侵权行为人可能被事实调查人确认曾经参与了作为一不可分损害法律原因的侵权行为，上述每一方与和解侵权行为
人都需遵从于由事实调查人分配的比较责任份额。
A20 [Not Applicable to This Track.] A路径第20条无此条可适用于该路径
A21 [Not Applicable to This Track.] A路径第21条无此条可适用于该路径
Track B - Several Liability路径B：单独责任
B18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm
If two or more persons, independent tortious conduct is the legal cause of an indivisible injury, each defendant, subject to the exception stated in §12, is severally liable for the comparative share of the plaintiff,s damages assigned to that defendant by the factfinder.
B路径第18条数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任
如果两个或两个以上人的独立侵权行为均构成一不可分损害的法律原因，每个人均对事实调查人分配给该人的原告损害赔偿的比较责任份额承担单独责任，适用本重述第12条例外规定的除外。
B19 Assignment of Responsibility: Severally Liable Defendants
If one or more defendants may be held severally liable for an indivisible injury, and at least one defendant and one other party, settling tortfeasor, or identified person may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party, settling tortfeasor, and other identified person is submitted to the factfinder for an assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
B路径第19条责任分配：负单独责任的被告
如果一名或者多名被告可能对一不可分损害承担单独责任，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人、和解侵权行为人，或者特定人[17]可能被事实调查人确定曾参与了作为受害人损害法律原因侵权行为，上述当事人、和解侵权行为人和特定人都遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。
B20 [Not Applicable to This Track.] B路径第20条无此条可适用于该路径
B21 [Not Applicable to This Track.] B路径第21条无此条可适用于该路径
Track C - Joint and Several Liability with Reallocation路径C：结合再分配的连带责任
C18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm
If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each person is jointly and severally liable for the recoverable damages caused by the tortious conduct, subject to the reallocation provision of §C21.
C路径第18条数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任
如果两个或两个以上的共同侵权行为构成一不可分损害的法律原因，那么根据本重述C路径第21条规定的再分配条款，每个人均对该侵权行为造成的可获得损害赔偿承担连带责任。
C19 Assignment of Responsibility: Jointly and Severally Liable Defendants If one defendant and at least one other party, settling tortfeasor, or employer described in §C20（a） whose comparative responsibility is legally relevant to apportioning liability for the plaintiff,s indivisible injury exist, each party, each settling tortfeasor, and, as permitted by §C20（a）, each employer who may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury is submitted to the fact-finder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
C路径第19条责任分配：负连带责任的被告
如果存在一个被告和至少一个另一方、和解侵权行为人或如本重述C路径第20条（a）所描述的，其比较责任在法律上与原告不可分损害的责任分配有关的雇主，可能被事调查人发现参与了作为原告损害的一个法律原因的请求行为的每一方、每个和解侵权行为人和每个由本重述C路径第20条（a）许可的雇主，均需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。
C20 Effect of Responsibility Assigned to Immune Employer
If a party alleges that the plaintiff,s employer bears some responsibility for the plaintiff,s injury:
（a） If the applicable law of the jurisdiction permits a reduction of recoverable damages based on the comparative responsibility of an employer otherwise immune from suit by the plaintiff-employee or permits a contribution claim by a defendant against the employer, the employer may be assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility and: （i） the recoverable damages are reduced as permitted by the applicable law； or （ii） contribution is awarded as permitted by the applicable law and the employer,s comparative responsibility.
（b） If the applicable law of the jurisdiction does not permit either a reduction of recoverable damages based on the comparative responsibility of an employer or a contribution claim against the employer, the employer may not be assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility.
C路径第20条分配给免责雇主的责任的效力
如果一方宣称原告的雇主对原告的损害负有一定的责任（，那么）：
（a）如果该司法辖区适用的法律允许基于雇主的比较责任对可获得损害赔偿的减少，否则免于被作为原告的雇员起诉，或者允许被告对雇主的分摊主张，雇主可能被分配一定份额的比较责任，并且：（i）对可获得损害赔偿的减少为适用的法律所允许；或（ii）分摊的裁定为适用法律和雇主的比较责任所允许。（b）如果该司法辖区适用的法律不允许基于雇主的比较责任减少可获得损害赔
偿，或（不允许）对雇主提出分摊主张，则不能向雇主分配比较责任份额。
C21 Reallocation of Damages Based on Unenforceability of Judgment （a）Except as provided in Subsection （b）, if a defendant establishes that a judgment for contribution cannot be collected fully from another defendant, the court reallocates the uncollectible portion of the damages to all other parties, including the plaintiff, in proportion to the percentages of comparative responsibility assigned to the other parties. （b） Reallocation under Subsection （a） is not available to any defendant subject to joint and several liability pursuant to §12 （intentional tortfeasors） or §15 （persons acting in concert）. Any defendant legally liable for the share of comparative fault assigned to another person pursuant to §13 （vicarious liability） or §14 （tortfeasors who fail to protect the plaintiff from the specific risk of an intentional tort）may not obtain reallocation of the liability imposed by those Sections. C路径第21条基于裁决不可执行的赔偿再分配
（a）除非如本条（b）款所规定，如果一个被告确认有关其分摊请求权的判决不可能从另一个被告那里完全受偿，法院将按照包括原告在内的其他各方被分配的比较责任份额，向他们重新分配赔偿金中不能受偿的部分。
（b）按照本条（a）款进行的重新分配，不适用于任何依据本重述第十二条（故意侵权行为人）或者第十五条（共同行为人）承担连带责任的被告。任何依据本重述第十三条（替代责任）或者第十四条（因未就某一故意侵权行为的具体风险对原告提供保护而承担责任的侵权行为人）而对分配给他人的比较过错份额承担法律责任的被告，不应接受的基于上述条款[18]的责任的重新分配。
Track D - Hybrid Liability Based on Threshold Percentage of Comparative Responsibility
路径D：基于比较责任份额界限的混合责任
D路径第18条数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任
如果两个或两个以上的共同侵权行为构成一不可分损害的法律原因，每个被分配等于或者超过法律规定界限比例比较责任的被告负连带责任，每个被分配少于法律规定界限比例比较责任的被告负单独责任，适用本重述第十二条（故意侵权行为人）规定的除外。
D18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm
If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each defendant who is assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility equal to or in excess of the legal threshold is jointly and severally liable, and each defendant who is assigned a percentage of comparative responsibility below the legal threshold is, subject to the exception in §12 （intentional tortfeasors）, severally liable.
D19 Assignment of Responsibility: Both Jointly and Severally Liable and
Severally Liable Defendants
（a）If one or more defendants may be held severally liable for an indivisible injury, and at least one defendant and one other party, settling tortfeasor, or identified person may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party, settling tortfeasor, and other identified person is submitted to the factfinder for an assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
（b）If all defendants can only be held jointly and severally liable for an indivisible injury, each party and each settling tortfeasor who may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury are submitted to the fact-finder for an assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
D20 [Not Applicable to This Track.]
D路径第19条责任分配：负连带责任的被告与负单独责任的被告
（a）如果一名或者多名被告可能对一不可分损害承担单独责任，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人、和解侵权行为人，或者特定人可能被事实调查人确定曾参与了作为受害人损害法律原因侵权行为，上述当事人、和解侵权行为人和特定人都遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。
（b）如果对所有被告均只能对一不可分损害适用连带责任，可能被事实调查人发现参与了作为原告损害的法律原因的侵权行为的每一方和每一和解侵权行为人都需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。
D21 [Not Applicable to This Track.]D路径第21条无此条可适用于该路径
Track E - Hybrid Liability Based on Type of Damages 4 路径E：基于赔偿种类的混合责任
E18 Liability of Multiple Tortfeasors for Indivisible Harm
If the independent tortious conduct of two or more persons is a legal cause of an indivisible injury, each defendant is jointly and severally liable for the economic-damages portion of the recoverable damages and, subject to the exceptions stated in §12 （intentional tortfeasors） and §15 （persons acting in concert）, is severally liable for that defendant,s comparative share of the noneconomic damages.
E路径第18条数个侵权行为人对不可分伤害的责任
如果一个或多个人的独立侵权行为构成一不可分伤害的法律原因，每个被告均对可获得损害赔偿中的经济损害部分承担连带责任，依据本重述第十二条（故意侵权行为人）和第十五条（共同行为人）的除外；对该被告的非经济损害部分的比较份额承担单独责任。
E19 Assignment of Responsibility: Joint and Several Liability for Economic Damages and Several Liability for Noneconomic Damages
（a）When plaintiff may recover only economic damages for an indivisible injury and at least one defendant and one other party or settling tortfeasor may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party and settling tortfeasor is submitted to the factfinder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
（b） When plaintiff may recover noneconomic damages and at least one defendant and one other party, settling tortfeasor, or identified person may be found by the factfinder to have engaged in tortious conduct that was a legal cause of the plaintiff,s injury, each such party, settling tortfeasor, and identified person is submitted to the factfinder for assignment of a percentage of comparative responsibility.
E路径第19条责任分配：对经济损害的连带责任以及对非经济赔偿的单独责任（a）当原告仅可能获得一不可分损害的经济损失赔偿，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人或和解侵权行为人可能被事实调查人发现曾参与了一项构成原告损害法律原因的侵权行为，上述各方和和解侵权行为人需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。
（b）当原告可能获得非经济损害赔偿，并且至少一位被告和一位另一方当事人、和解侵权行为人，或者特定人，可能被事实调查人发现曾参与了一项构成原告损害法律原因的侵权行为，上述各方、和解侵权行为人和该特定人需遵从事实调查人对比较责任份额的分配。
E20 [Not Applicable to This Track.] E路径第20条无此条可适用于该路径E21 [Not Applicable to This Track.] E路径第21条无此条可适用于该路径Topic 3- Contribution and Indemnity第三题：分担与补偿[19]
22 Indemnity第二十二条补偿
（a）When two or more persons are or may be liable for the same harm and one of them discharges the liability of another in whole or in part by settlement or discharge of judgment, the person discharging the liability is entitled to recover indemnity in the amount paid to the plaintiff, plus reasonable legal expenses, if:
（1）the indemnitor has agreed by contract to indemnify the indemnitee, or
（2） the indemnitee
（i）was not liable except vicariously for the tort of the indemnitor, or
（ii）was not liable except as a seller of a product supplied to the indemnitee by the indemnitor and the indemnitee was not independently culpable.
（b） A person who is otherwise entitled to recover indemnity pursuant
to contract may do so even if the party against whom indemnity is sought would not be liable to the plaintiff.
（a）当两个或两个以上的人对同一伤害承担或可能承担责任时，其中一人通过和解或履行判决免除他人的全部或部分责任时，免除责任的一方有权（从该他人处）获得支付给原告数额的补偿，在以下情况还包括合理的法律费用支出：（1）补偿人事先通过签订合同同意补偿受补偿人，或
（2）受补偿人
（i）除非因替代责任[20]，否则不对补偿人的侵权行为负责，或
（ii）除非补偿人是为受补偿人提供产品的卖方，且受补偿人并非单独具有可责难性，否则不负责任。
（b）有权依照合同获得补偿的人，即使在寻求补偿的人的对方当事人并不对原告负责的情况下，仍然可以行使补偿请求权。
23 Contribution第二十三条分担
（a）When two or more persons are or may be liable for the same harm and one of them discharges the liability of another by settlement or discharge of judgment, the person discharging the liability is entitled to recover contribution from the other, unless the other previously had a valid settlement and release from the plaintiff.
（b） A person entitled to recover contribution may recover no more than the amount paid to the plaintiff in excess of the person,s comparative share of responsibility.
（c） A person who has a right of indemnity against another person under §22 does not have a right of contribution against that person and is not subject to liability for contribution to that person.
（a）当两人或多人对或可能对同一伤害承担责任而其中一人已通过和解或履行裁决承担他人责任时，承担他人责任的该人有权向该他人追偿责任分担，除非该他人此前已与原告达成有效的和解、得到原告的免除。
（b）有权追偿责任分担的人可以获得不多于该人支付给原告的数额中超出该人比较责任份额的部分。
（c）依据第22节享有免责权的一方对免责方不享有分摊权，并且不对该免责方负有分摊责任。
Topic 4- Settlement第四题：和解
24 Definition and Effect of Settlement
（a） A settlement is a legally enforceable agreement in which a claimant agrees not to seek recovery outside the agreement for specified injuries or claims from some or all of the persons who might be liable for those injuries or claims.
（b） Persons released from liability by the terms of a settlement are relieved of further liability to the claimant for the injuries or claims covered by the agreement, but the agreement does not discharge any other person from liability.
第二十四条和解的定义与效力
（a）和解是一份具有法律强制性的协议，在该协议中请求权人同意在协议之外，不再针对该特别损害寻求额外赔偿，或者向部分或所有可能对相关损害或主张负责的人提出主张。
（b）通过和解方式免除责任的人，在和解协议所涵盖的特别损害或者主张的范围内，可能产生的对请求权人的未来责任也得到了免除，但该和解协议并不免除任何其他人的责任。
25 Satisfaction of Claim Through Discharge of Judgment
第二十五条通过履行判决满足诉讼请求
（a）When a judgment includes a determination of the entirety of recoverable damages suffered by the plaintiff for an indivisible injury and provides for their recovery by the plaintiff against one or more of the defendants, payment of the full amount of recoverable damages constitutes a satisfaction of the plaintiff,s rights against all tortfeasors legally responsible for the plaintiff,s indivisible injury. （b）When a judgment includes a determination of the entirety of recoverable damages suffered by the plaintiff for an indivisible injury and provides for their recovery by the plaintiff against multiple defendants, payment by one or more judgment defendants of less than the full amount of the recoverable damages constitutes a reduction of the plaintiff,s right to recover from the judgment defendants in the amount of the value of the payment.
（c） When a judgment against one or more tortfeasors, none of whom is jointly and severally liable, is for an amount that is or may be less than all of the recoverable damages by the plaintiff, payment of the amount of the judgment does not constitute a satisfaction of the plaintiff,s rights against all tortfeasors.
（a）当一项判决包括了对原告因遭受的一项不可分损害而可获得损害赔偿的损害范围的确定，并提供原告可从被告中的一个或多个处获得赔偿时，对原告可获得损害赔偿的全额支付，构成了对原告享有的对所有对原告所受该不可分损害负有法律责任的侵权行为人的请求权的满足。
（b）当一项判决包括了对原告因遭受的一项不可分损害而可获得损害赔偿的损害范围的确定，并提供原告可从多个共同被告处获得赔偿时，该案被告中的一个或者多个支付的少于原告可获得损害赔偿总额的赔偿等额减少原告可从该案被告获得的赔偿额。
（c）当一项确认了少于或者可能少于原告可获得损害赔偿数额的判决，是针对一个或者多个侵权行为人，而他们中没有任何人承担连带责任时，对判决确定的该赔偿额的支付并不构成对原告针对所有侵权行为人权利的满足。
Topic 5- Apportionment of Liability when Damages can be Divided by Causation
第五题：损害可依因果关系分割时的责任分担
26 Apportionment of Liability When Damages Can Be Divided by Causation （a）When damages for an injury can be divided by causation, the factfinder first divides them into their indivisible component parts and separately apportions liability for each indivisible component part under Topics 1 through 4.
（b） Damages can be divided by causation when the evidence provides a reasonable basis for the factfinder to determine:
（1） that any legally culpable conduct of a party or other relevant person to whom the fact-finder assigns a percentage of responsibility was a legal cause of less than the entire damages for which the plaintiff seeks recovery and
（2） the amount of damages separately caused by that conduct. Otherwise, the damages are indivisible and thus the injury is indivisible. Liability for an indivisible injury is apportioned under Topics 1 through 4.
第二十六条损害可依因果关系分割时的责任分担
（a）当对某一损害的赔偿可依因果关系被分割时，事实调查人首先将其分割为其不可再分的组成部分，然后依据上述第一至四题的规定，就每一不可再分的组成部分单独分配责任。
（b）当有关证据提供了可使事实调查人确定以下事项的合理依据时，赔偿可依因果关系被分割；
（1）被事实调查人向其分配责任份额的一方当事人或其他相关人，其任何具有法律上可责难性的行为，构成少于原告所寻求获得的全部赔偿额[21]的一项法律原因，并且；
（2）此赔偿数额为该行为单独造成。
否则，赔偿便不可分割，因此有关损害也不可分割。对一不可分损害的责任应依据第一至四题进行分配。
Part Three: Products Liability 产品责任
Restatement of the Law, Third, Torts: Products Liability
Copyright ? 1998 by The American Law Institute
《侵权法重述第三版：产品责任》
Chapter 1- Liability of Commercial Product Sellers Based on Product Defects at Time of Sale
第一章基于销售时产品缺陷的商业产品销售者责任
Topic 1- Liability Rules Applicable to Products Generally主题1普遍适用于产品的责任规则
1 Liability of Commercial Seller or Distributor for Harm Caused by
Defective Products
商业销售者或者分发者因缺陷产品导致损害的责任
One engaged in the business of selling or otherwise distributing products who sells or distributes a defective product is subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by the defect.
从事产品销售或者以其他方式分发[1]的经营者，销售或者分发缺陷产品，应对该缺陷所造成的人身或者财产损害承担责任。
2 Categories of Product Defect.产品缺陷的种类
A product is defective when, at the time of sale or distribution, it contains a manufacturing defect, is defective in design, or is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings. A product:
(a) contains a manufacturing defect when the product departs from its intended design even though all possible care was exercised in the preparation and marketing of the product;
(b) is defective in design when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the alternative design renders the product not reasonably safe;
(c) is defective because of inadequate instructions or warnings when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the provision of reasonable instructions or warnings by the seller or other distributor, or a predecessor in the commercial chain of distribution, and the omission of the instructions or warnings renders the product not reasonably safe.
产品在销售或者分发时，包含制造缺陷，设计存在缺陷，或者因为说明或警示不充分而存在缺陷，则该产品存在缺陷。产品：
（a）如果背离其设计意图，即便在该产品准备和营销过程中已尽到所有可能的注意，那么（产品）包含制造缺陷；
（b）如果可预见的因该产品引起的损害风险能够通过销售者或以其他方式分发者，或者他们在分销商业链中的前手，通过采纳合理替代性设计而减少或者避免，而没有采纳合理替代性设计致使产品不具有合理性安全，那么（产品）设计存在缺陷；
（c）如果可预见的因该产品引起的损害风险能够通过销售者或以其他方式分发者，或者他们在分销商业链中的前手，通过提供合理的说明或警示而减少或者避免，而没有提供合理的说明或警示致使产品不具有合理性安全，那么（产品）因说明或警示不足而存在缺陷。
3 Circumstantial Evidence Supporting Inference of Product Defect
支持推断产品缺陷的间接证据
It may be inferred that the harm sustained by the plaintiff was caused
论惩罚性赔偿的损害填补功能_以美国侵权法惩罚性赔偿制度为启示的研究
第52卷第3期吉林大学社会科学学报Vol．52No．3 2012年5月Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition May，2012 □民法典研究 论惩罚性赔偿的损害填补功能 ———以美国侵权法惩罚性赔偿制度为启示的研究 马新彦邓冰宁 ［摘要］惩罚性赔偿的损害填补功能关涉惩罚性赔偿制度的正当性证成，这是大多数美国学者不 遗余力对其进行论证的主要原因。惩罚性赔偿高于受害人可见的实际损害部分，填补的是受害人私 人可见损害背后的无形损害。该无形损害通常难以用金钱衡量，这就是惩罚性赔偿通常以可见损害 的倍数计算赔偿数额的原因。无形损害可以是受害人私人难以用金钱衡量的精神损害，也可以是难 以用金钱衡量的社会整体利益的损害。于侵权行为对社会整体利益造成巨大损害场合，惩罚性赔偿 制度能够激励受害人积极主张权利，并借助于受害人个人利益损失的赔偿填补社会整体利益的损 害，令被告承担应当承担的责任。 ［关键词］美国侵权法；惩罚性赔偿；损害填补功能；社会性损害 ［收稿日期］2011－10－10 ［作者简介］马新彦，吉林大学法学院教授，法学博士；邓冰宁，吉林大学法学院博士研究生。 （长春130012） 《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》（以下简称《侵权责任法》）第47条明确规定了产品责任中的惩罚性赔偿制度：“但根据法律规定，产品责任中的惩罚性赔偿，仅限于缺陷产品致受害人死亡或者健康受到严重损害的范围内适用，除此之外的其他损害不予适用，例如，财产损害。”［1］545惩罚性赔偿受到如此限制的重要原因在于其迷惑性的名称———“惩罚性”赔偿。这种“超额”的责任已超出传统意义上的损害填补范畴，是一种民法领域的“惩罚”。但不可否认的是，尽管具有“惩罚性”的修饰词，这一概念的基础和本源依然是“赔偿”。既然是“赔偿”，其先天具有的损害填补功能，将惩罚性赔偿制度作为民法领域的“制裁”同公法领域的“制裁”区分开来，并为具有民事责任复原功能的代表性［2］7和填补损害的基本机能性［3］7特点的侵权法体系内设计惩罚性赔偿制度提供了正当性基础，从而避免了难以调和的逻辑混乱和理念冲突。本文以美国侵权法惩罚性赔偿制度的损害填补功能的研究为进路，揭示惩罚性赔偿制度的本质在于通过填补侵权行为的全部损害实现惩罚和阻却的目的，为进一步完善《侵权责任法》提供理论支持。 一、美国惩罚性赔偿的损害填补功能 （一）美国侵权法关于惩罚性赔偿损害填补功能的认定 美国侵权法始终将填补损害作为惩罚性赔偿的本源，或者准确地说惩罚性赔偿制度就是为了填补侵权法一般损害赔偿责任无法救济的损害而产生的。虽然惩罚性赔偿所填补的损害在法制的历史变革中有所变化，但是，损害填补始终是惩罚性赔偿制度的基本功能［4］615。特别是当现有法律提供的损害赔偿不足以救济损害时，惩罚性赔偿总能发挥特有的损害填补功能，填补所有损害超出法律救济的部分，实现侵权法所追求的损害完全填补的目标。
制作英文简历时的各种奖项中英文对照
一、国家及校级奖项、称号 国家奖学金——National Scholarship 国家励志奖学金National Encouragement scholarship 校一等奖：The First Prize Scholarship 校二等奖：The Second Prize Scholarship 校三等奖：The Third Prize Scholarship 单项奖学金：Individual Scholarship 三好学生标兵——Pacemaker to Merit Student 三好学生——Merit Student 学习优秀生——Model Student of Academic Records 突出才能奖——Model Student of Outstanding Capacity 先进个人——Advanced Individual/Outstanding Student 优秀工作者——Excellent staff 优秀学生干部——Excellent Student Cadre 优秀共青团员——Excellent League Member 优秀毕业生——Outstanding Graduates 优秀志愿者——Outstanding Volunteer 先进班集体——Advanced Class 优秀团干——Outstanding League Cadres 学生协会优秀干部——Outstanding cadres of Student Association 学生协会工作优秀个人Outstanding Individual of Student Association 精神文明先进个人——Spiritual Advanced Individual 社会工作先进个人——Advanced Individual of Social Work 文体活动先进个人——Advanced Individual of Cultural and sports activiti es 道德风尚奖————Ethic Award 精神文明奖————High Morality Prize 最佳组织奖————Prize for The Best Organization 突出贡献奖————Prize for The Outstanding Contribution 工作创新奖————Prize for The Creative Working 团队建设奖————Prize for The Team Contribution 二、各系比赛与奖项 外语系（Foreign Language Department）: 话剧比赛————Drama competition 英语演讲比赛——English Speech Contest 八系辩论赛————Eight Departments Invitational Debate Competition 黑板报设计大赛——Blackboard Poster Design Contest PPT设计大赛——Courseware Design Competition 文明宿舍————Outstanding Dormitory OK杯篮球比赛——OK Cup for Basketball Game 我心飞扬歌唱比赛——“My Heart Flies”Singing Competition 中文系( Department of Chinese Language and Literature)： 诗歌朗诵比赛——Poetry Recitation Contest
中英文对照简历模板
XXX 性别： 民族 : 籍贯： 出生日期： 年 月 日 政治面貌： 专业： 电话： 电子邮箱： 教育背景 ·2006、9至今 XX 市XX 大学，XX 专业。 ·主修课程 高等数学、航空运输经济、市场营销、国际贸易、财务管理、战略 管理、市场营销、市场调查与预测、数据库原理、统计学原理与民 航统计、机场营运管理、会计学原理与民航运输会计、人力资源管 理、概率论与数理统计。 学生工作 ·2006-2008 担任学生会XX 部部长 负责XXXXXXXXXXXX ·2006-2008 担任XXX 办公室主任 主要负责会议计划和记录等。 所获荣誉 ·2006、12 校级优秀大学生 ·2007、12 校级优秀大学生 ·2007、4 校级优秀共青团员 ·2007、4 2007年全国第九届大学生篮球联赛东北赛区青年志愿者 个人信息 ·英语 CET-4，552，具有良好的读写能力。 ·计算机 熟练掌握Word, Excel, PowerPoint 等Office 办公软件，还精通Photoshop 系列软件。 ·个人爱好 乒乓球、旅游、读书、经济。 ·自我评价 责任心强，适应能力强，有良好的团队合作精神。 照 片
英文名 Room XXXBuilding North XX Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300 电话 (022) 电话Email: Gender: Female Birthplace: Date of Birth: June 1st, 1987 Political status: Y outh League EDUCATION ·Mar，2006 –present Civil Aviation University of China Tianjin Dept.of Business Administration. ·Academic Main Courses： Advanced mathematics、Principles of Statistics、Principles of Accounting、Management Information Systems、Information Retrieval、Economic law、Enterprise Strategy、International Trade、Marketing、Financ ial Management、Operations Research、Air cargo transportation、 Air transport economics、Strategic Management、Human Resource Management. WORK EXPERIENCE · 2006-2008 be the minister of the Editorial Department of theXXXUnion. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX · 2006-2008 be the Director of the Office Department of the Self-agency Primarily responsible for meeting organization and planning. AWARDS & HONORS · Dec 2006 Colonel-level excellent students， ·Dec 2007 Colonel-level excellent students， ·Apr 2007 Colonel-level excellent Y outh League， ·Apr 2007 as a Y oung volunteers of the 9th CUBA 2007 Northeast Region Matches. PERSONAL INFORMATION ·English ·A good command of both spoken and written English.， ·CET-4,552. ·Computer ·Master user of Microsoft Office software, such as Word, Excel, PowerPoint； ·Familiar with applied program，including Photoshop etc. ·Interests ·Table-tennis, Traveling, Reading, Economy . ·Self-Evaluation ·Strong sense of responsibility, ·Good spirit of teamwork, ·Can learn new things well in short time. THANK YOU FOR READING
国家赔偿法归责原则之分析
国家赔偿法归责原则之分析 国家赔偿制度的建立与完善标志着人类民主与文明的进一步发展，也是法制建立与完善的一个重要标志。各国国家赔偿制度中所确立的归责原则体系又直接决定着该国国家赔偿的广度与深度。本文首先从归责原则入手，进而对目前几种比较重要的国家赔偿的归责原则予以介绍，之后进一步分析我国国家赔偿法中确立的归责原则，指出其不足之处，并在文章最后提出几种解决问题的方法。 一、国家赔偿与归责原则 国家赔偿制度在各国的建立与完善都是近期的事情。其产生之所以如此之晚，究其原因有以下两个。其一是以主权和责任的相互矛盾为基础的主权豁免原则的存在。①这原则在大陆国家和英美国家都曾长期适用。其二是源于法治国家原理的观念，认为违法行为归属国家是根本不能成立的，即使因国家雇员、官吏的违法行为给人民带来损害，也没有由国家本身承担损害赔偿责任之道理，而应由官吏个人对受害者承担责任。②但是，近代以来，随着“主权至上”思想的逐渐消失，主权豁免的法理已被抛弃。“虽然不能对国家的人格加以绝对的否弃，但它的范围应当受到明确的限定，也就是说，国家只在某些场合之下可以被视为一个人格主体，而且，在某些情况之下，国家还可以被看成是享有双重人格，每一人格都具有独特的性质。”③也正是在主权至上理论瓦解的基础之上，前面所述的国家不负责任的第二个理由，法治国思想也产生了新的涵义，国家行为必须依据法律(法律的内容必须符合一定的标准，即必须是正义的法律)。因此，国家作为一个人格主体，一但其行为给公民的合法权益造成损失，必须承担相应的补偿或赔偿责任(补偿责任的前提是国家的合法行为给公民、法人或其他组织造成损失)。由上述的分析可以发现，国家赔偿制度的产生有其背后思想观念的根本转变。 虽然国家赔偿制度在许多国家已经建立起来。但是，各国国家赔偿责任的归责原则却有很大的分歧。在对这些原则进行具体分析之前，有必要明确归责原则的涵义。 “归责”一词，最早是在民法学中提出，是指“行为人因其行为或物件致他人损害的事实发生以后，应依据何种根据使其负责……”④可见，归责其实质是一种根据，是把致害行为与赔偿责任连接起来的桥梁。民法中的归责原则概括起来有三种体系。一是一元体系，这是坚持单一的过错归责理论，在过错归责原则之中包括其他的归责原则。二是二元体系，认为侵权责任应以过失责任与危险责任作为归责原则的核心。最后是三元体系，这种体系的主张者认为归责原则应基于主观意思而归责的“故意责任”，基于客观信赖而归责的“过失责任”和纯粹基于危险而归责的“危险责任”。⑤目前，以三元体系的影响效大。通过对民法的归责原则体系的说明，可以发现，即使是一元体系，其归责原则也是多层面的，立体的，而不是由完全的单一的归责原则作为其体系的全部内容。 二、国家赔偿法中的归责原则 在分析国家赔偿法的归责原则之前，之所以要首先理解民事侵权法上的归责原则，其原因在于国家赔偿法是在借鉴了民法的基础之上产生的。分析各国的赔偿制度，绝大多数是在借鉴民法之精神。因此，同一般侵权赔偿的归责原则一样，应用一般效为宽广的眼界来看待国家赔偿法上的归责原则。 世界各国在国家赔偿法中所确立的归责原则有代表性的有三种：法国采用的公务过错为主，以危险责任为辅的归责原则体系；德、意、英、美等国采用的过错原则的归责原则体系和以瑞士和中国为代表的违法归责原则。 (一)过错原则 过错原则之所以能成为国家赔偿法中归责原则的理论基础，主要因为其功能和价值。首先，过错责任原则实现了规范与救济的有机统一。过错是对政府行为的法律价值评判。
美国签证提交简历中英文样板---Sample-Resume-(使馆提供)
姓名(拼音和汉字): 性别: 出生日期: 出生地: 家庭住址: 单位地址: 家庭电话: 工作电话: 手机号码: 电子邮箱: 教育背景–请分别列出您取得的所有学位，从最高学位写起。 月，年—月，年大学名称 学位和专业 论文标题/研究焦点（只对硕士和博士学位）工作经历–请列举您的所有工作经历。 月，年—月，年单位名称 地址 职位或职称 工作职责 所获奖项及加入哪些团体组织（如果适用） 出版物—请列出您发表的所有出版物标题、合作者和年份（如果适用）
出国经历—请列举您到访过的所有国家及到访时间 国家（年） 例如：美国（2002，2003）；加拿大（2008，2009） 同行人–请写出和您一起赴美的所有同行人姓名及与您的关系
Name (in pinyin and Chinese): Gender: Date of Birth: Place of Birth: Home Address: Business Address: Home Phone: Work Phone: Mobile Phone: E-mail: Education – please list all degrees attained, beginning with the most recent Month, Year – Month, Year University Name Degree and Major Thesis Topic/Research Focus (for masters and phd degrees) Work Experience – please list all work experience Month, Year – Month, Year Employer Location Position or Title Duties Awards and Group Memberships – if any
个人英文简历中英文对照
个人英文简历中英文对照 专业外语Specialized English 大学物理College Physics 马克思主义哲学原理(认识论) Principle of Marxist Philosophy(Epistem ology) 邓小平理论Deng Xiaoping Theory 毛泽东思想研究Study on Mao Zedong Thought 毛泽东政治思想研究Research on Mao ZeDong Political Thought2 毛泽东哲学思想研究Research of Mao Zedong's Philosophy Thought 体育Physical Education 思想品德修养Cultivation of Ideological Morality 形势政策教育 Teaching of Situation and Policy 军事理论Military Theory 政治经济学Political Economics 高等数学含现性代数Advanced Mathematics (Including Linear Algebr a) 概率论与数理统计Probability and Mathematical Statistics 运算机应用基础Basics of Computer Applications 数据库概论Introduction to Database 大学英语College English 大学语文(文科) The University Language and Literature (Liberal art s) 大学语文(理科) The University Language and Literature (Science) 工商治理 西方经济学概论Introduction to Western Economics 治理心理学 Psychology of Management 治理学原理Principles of Management Science 统计学原理Principles of Statistics 会计学原理Principles of Accounting 治理信息系统Management Information Systems 信息检索Information Retrieval 经济法学 Economic law 企业战略Enterprise Strategy 财政学Public Finance 货币银行学Monetary Economics and Banking 国际金融International Finance 国际贸易International Trade 生产治理Productive
个人简历的中英文对照
一、国家及校级奖项、称号 国家奖学金National Scholarship 国家励志奖学金National Encouragement scholarship 三好学生标兵Pacemaker to Merit Student 三好学生Merit Student 学习优秀生Model Student of Academic Records 突出才能奖Model Student of Outstanding Capacity 先进个人Advanced Individual/Outstanding Student 优秀工作者Excellent staff 优秀学生干部Excellent Student Cadre 优秀共青团员Excellent League Member 优秀毕业生Outstanding Graduates 优秀志愿者Outstanding Volunteer 先进班集体Advanced Class 优秀团干Outstanding League Cadres 学生协会优秀干部Outstanding cadres of Student Association 学生协会工作优秀个人Outstanding Individual of Student Association 精神文明先进个人Spiritual Advanced Individual 社会工作先进个人Advanced Individual of Social Work 文体活动先进个人Advanced Individual of Cultural and sports activities 道德风尚奖Ethic Award 精神文明奖High Morality Prize 最佳组织奖Prize for The Best Organization 突出贡献奖Prize for The Outstanding Contribution 工作创新奖Prize for The Creative Working 团队建设奖Prize for The Team Contribution 二、各系比赛与奖项
中英文简历全套简历模板
诺和诺德 [请输入文档标题] [请输入文档副标题] [请输入作者]
Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving. 生活就像骑单车，只有不断前进，才能保持平衡。 P E R S O N A L N a m e: H a n Zhongyu G e n d e r: Female A g e : 19 Health: Excellent Hobbies: Paint draw, Badminton ， Personality: Honest , Creative, Cooperative, Dutiful and Dedicated, St r o n g,p r o v e n c o m m u n i c a t i o n s a b i l i t i e s b o t h w r i t t e n a n d v e r b a l i n E n g l i s h OBJECTIVE ? ~ EDUCA TION ? ~ ? ~ ? ~ ? ~ WORKING E X P E R I E N C E ~ ? TIME ： ~ ? POSITION ：
EXPERIENCE ： ~ ? ~ ? TIME ： ~ ? POSITION ： ~ ? EXPERIENCE ： ~ KNO WLEDGE B A C K G R O U N D ? Hardware —— System s t u d i e d The C i r c u i t E l e m e n t s, The S i m u l a t i o n Circuit, The D i g i t a l Circuit , The Function o f Computer Hardware T echnology ? Software —— Expert in computer programming ,familiar with the software of MA TLAB , C , PRO/E , AutoCAD
美国简历中英文对照
美国签证需要用到的个人简历模板（中英文） Nonimmigrant Visa Resume Template Name: Date and country of birth: Gender: Name and date of birth of spouse: (if applicable) Names and dates of birth of children: (if applicable) Address and Contact information: Education List here all universities and higher education institutions you have attended, starting with the most recent. You should include the following information: Name of university Dates of study Degree level Degree major and minors Area of research Title of thesis Work experience List here all paid and voluntary work you have performed and positions held, starting with the most recent. You should include the following information: Name of company, organization or institutions Job titles Dates of jobs Detailed area of responsibility, research interests, project descriptions and applications of research Expertise in special software, machinery op equipment Awards and patents Have you received/won any awards related to your research or work at university or at work? Please list these. Do you hold any patents? List name, patent number and year registered. List of publications List here all your publications you have published in China and overseas. Include the title of the published article, the date it was published and the name of the magazine, newspaper, book, etc it was published in. Other outside interests/experience List here any clubs you belong to, any memberships you hold, your interests and hobbies Other skills
浅析我国国家赔偿法归责原则
浅析我国国家赔偿法归责原则 摘要：国家赔偿的归责原则是国家赔偿责任的理论基石，是从法律价值上判断国家在何种情况下承担赔偿责任的根本标准和依据。但自我国国家赔偿制度实施以来，一元化的归责原则体系缺陷已暴露出来，已经表现出与社会的极大的不适应性，使国家赔偿法成为国家不赔法，而造成这种结局的原因在于归责原则的出发点存在偏差。借鉴国外的多元的归责体系,可以尝试建立以违法归责原则和过错归责原则为一般的归责原则,其适用于一般的国家侵权行为领域;同时,针对特殊的国家侵权行为适用无过错归责原则、结果归责原则等辅助归责原则,从而建立起对不同的国家职权行为以及不同领域适用不同的归责原则的一个多元化的归责体系,努力做到保护受害人合法权益与国家赔偿责任的协调统一。 [关键词]：国家赔偿;违法归责原则;归责体系 我国现行国家赔偿法实施已经有十多年。该法在保护行政相对人的合法权益,督促国家机关依法行政方面,发挥了较大的积极作用,但实施效果距立法宗旨和民众的期望仍相差甚远,其在实践中的缺陷甚至使该法被讥为“国家不赔法”。该法的主要缺陷,就是现行国家赔偿法第2条第1款规定的违法归责原则。该原则是与立法时的法制环境相适应的,但已经无法适应日益复杂的国家侵权现实。目前,我国立法机关正在对国家赔偿法进行修改,如何确立新的归责原则,成了争议的焦点和修改的着力点[ 1 ]。从现行国家赔偿法对归责原则的规定入手,分析其存在的不足,并建议借鉴国外的多元的归责体系,可以尝试建立以违法归责原则和过错归责原则为一般的归责原则,其适用于一般的国家侵权行为领域;同时,针对特殊的国家侵权行为适用无过错归责原则、结果归责原则等辅助归责原则,从而建立起对不同的国家职权行为以及不同领域适用不同的归责原则的一个多元化的归责体系,努力做到保护受害人合法权益与国家赔偿责任的协调统一。 一、我国现行国家赔偿法对归责原则的现状 国家赔偿的归责原则是指国家机关及其工作人员因行使职权侵犯公民、法人和其他组织的合法权益造成损害的,由国家承担赔偿责任。 根据我国国家赔偿法第2条第1款规定:“国家机关和国家机关工作人员违法行使职权侵犯公民、法人和其他组织的合法权益造成损害的,受害人有依照本法取得国家赔偿的权利”。由此,我国现行国家赔偿法的归责原则采用单一的违法原则,即只有或只要国家机关的职权行为违法侵害公民、法人或者其他组织合法权益,造成损害后果的就应当赔偿。因此,国家机关及其工作人员的职权行为只有构成违法侵权的,才承担赔偿责任;如果该行为并不违法,即
人大法硕培养方案
中国人民大学法学院 2013级攻读法律硕士专业学位（非法学类）研究生培养方案 一、适用学科专业 法律硕士 (学习年限：全国统考非法律专业全日制3年，非全日制3－4 年)（学科门类：法学一级学科：法学） 二、培养目标 为立法、司法、行政执法、法律服务与监督以及经济管理、社会管理等实际部门培养德才兼备的、适应社会主义市场经济和社会主义法治建设需要的高层次的复合型、应用型法律专门人才和管理人才。 三、课程设置和学分要求（见附表） 攻读硕士学位研究生期间，需要获得学位课程总学分不少于79学分。必修课不少于39学分；选修课不少于20学分；社会实践12学分；学位论文8学分。 四、社会实践 没有法学专业教育背景，也没有法律职业实务背景的法律硕士专业学位研究生，需要进行相应的实务课程性质的必修环节,共四门实践课程，12学分，时间安排在第四和第五学期。其中法律实践课需在法院或检察院或律师事务所实习三个月。 五、论文撰写 硕士生在学期间应完成的论文包括：课程论文和学位论文。学位论文选题以理论联系实际为原则。论文可以采用案例分析、调研报告、学术报告等形式。因此，在论文选题上应避免进行单纯的宏观性或纯理论研究；应尽可能结合作者本人的实践经验，研究当前法制建设中的重要实际问题，要求论文有一定的理论价值和实际意义，并尽可能做到具有开创性或创新性。论文工作时间不少于半年。附：课程设置、学分要求和开课时间 1、必修课（不少于39学分）学分要求开课时间 ZRQC013法理学 3 学分第1 学期 (Jurisprudence) ZRQC014中国特色社会主义法治理论 2 学分第1 学期 (Democracy and Legality Theory of China) ZRQC015刑法学 4 学分第 1 学期 (Criminal Law) ZRQC016中国法制史 2 学分第 1 学期
浅析混凝土质量管理
试析混凝土质量管理 1 原材料控制 普通混凝土是由水泥、水、粗细骨料、化学外加剂、矿物质混合材料，按比例配合，经过均匀拌制，振捣密实成型及养护硬化而成的人工石材。混凝土的质量好坏主要由原材料来决定，所以原材料的控制显得尤为重要，是混凝土质量控制的源头，只有把源头控制好，混凝土质量才能有保证。对发现的不合格原材料必须严格清退出场并做好记录，规范原材料堆放，保存和使用，杜绝使用不合格材料。 1.1 水泥 水泥有多种品种、标号，应根据设计图纸的要求和实际使用部位的环境条件，选择适当的水泥品种和标号。高强混凝土应优先选择高标号水泥进行试配。所有的混凝土工程用的水泥都需要厂家合格证，经过自检试验室或者委托实验室检验合格后才能使用。水泥是混凝土结构中最关键的原材料之一，必须从严把关，抽检频率必须符合相关技术规范的要求，不能处于失控状态。 1.2 砂 细骨料砂，要重点检查其质地、级配、细度模数、含泥量和有害物质含量。其重点是含泥量和有害物质含量。这两项对于混凝土强度的影响较大。用于拌制混凝土的细度模数应在3.7-1.6之间。结构用砂含泥量一般不应超过3%，有害物用质（云母、有机物、硫酸盐等）含量不应超过2%。同时，级配良好也是选用砂的重要指标。 1.3 石子
粗骨料石子，应重点检查其质地、级配、针片状颗粒含量、含量泥量及最大粒径。一般采用1㎝-3㎝的碎石，卵石一般能用于结构受力部位，严禁混有煅烧过的石灰石块或白云石块。选择级配良好的粗骨料对于提高混凝土强度及质量有着很大的实际意义。 1.4 水 凡是不能饮用的水，应在水质化验和抗腐蚀试验合格后，方可用于拌制混凝土。污水、工业废水、PH值小于4的酸性水和硫酸盐含量超过水重1%的水，不能用于拌制混凝土。对预应力混凝土的施工用水，更要着重控制。 1.5 外加剂 添加外加剂是现代混凝土产品有针对性得提高工程性能的一种重要手段。在选用某种外加剂之前应做好以下几方面工作。首先，应检查外加剂生产厂家的生产许可证，质量保证资料和有相应资质的检测单位出具的性能试验报告。其次，应进行试配并进行试验检验，以复验混凝土外加剂与工程所有水泥是否相适应，以及是否满足施工要求的混凝土性能和有关设计要求指示（如坑渗标号等）。另外，应注意混凝土外加剂使用说明的有效日期、防止过期失效的外加剂用于工程。同时，要严格控制剂量，不得随意添加，在搅拌混凝土时，掺加外加剂的混凝土搅拌时间应适当延长。选用外加剂要熟悉其品种、性能，经检验符合本工程要求方可使用。严禁使用对工程质量和耐久性有不利影响的外加剂。 2 配合比的质量控制
美国英文简介-An Introduction to U.S.
The United States of America (also referred to as the United States, the U.S., the USA, or America) is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district. The country is situated mostly in central North America, where its forty-eight contiguous states and Washington, D.C., the capital district, lie between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, bordered by Canada to the north and Mexico to the south. The state of Alaska is in the northwest of the continent, with Canada to the east and Russia to the west across the Bering Strait. The state of Hawaii is an archipelago in the mid-Pacific. The country also possesses several territories in the Caribbean and Pacific. At 3.79 million square miles and with over 310 million people, the United States is the third or fourth largest country by total area. It is one of the world's most ethnically diverse and multicultural nations, the product of large-scale immigration from many countries. The
美国侵权法中的事实自证规则研究(F)
美国侵权法中事实自证规则研究 过错责任理论的建立最早见之于17世纪法国学家让?多马的过错责任学说。多马针对一些受害人难以证明被告人过失的情况下提出了过错推定的学说。这些情况包括父母、主人与雇主、手艺人对其监督下的他人行为的责任，动物致损和建筑物致损责任等。后来这些主张被1804年的《法国民法典》所采纳。在德国1900年《德国民法典》第280条—282条，831—838条对雇佣人、监护人、动物占有人、房屋或地面工作物占有人的责任以及债务不履行的责任都采用了过错推定规则。[1]英美法上的事实自证规则（res ipsa loquitur）[2]也是属于过错推定的范畴。 一、事实自证规则的概念 事实自证规则源于1863年的Byrne诉Boadle, 159Eng. Rep.299(Eng.1863)一案。该案中原告在街上行走经过被告的商店，突然被从被告商店客户里飞出的一袋面粉砸伤。于是原告起诉了被告，但他除了能证明自己的伤势和面粉是从被告商店里飞出来的以外，完全不知道究竟是哪一个人扔的面粉以及他是如何被面粉击中自己的。英国大法官皮洛克（Pollock）在判决中指出，“原告已提供的证据已经足够了，一袋面粉没有过失行为怎么可能从仓库中飞出来，被伤害的原告要找证人证明这种过失行为是荒谬的，…面粉是在占有该房的被告的控制中，被告为控制面粉的员工行为负责，面粉丢下去是过失的表面证据，被面粉砸伤的原告无须证明没有过失面粉不会丢下去。如事实与过失侵权相符合的话，证明的责任在于被告。”[3]皮洛克法官公认第一次把事实自证的原则运用到司法审判实践中，其判决道出了这一原则的基本精神和意义，该案件由于观点独到，分析精辟，至今为后世法官所引用。 根据权威的《布莱克法律辞典》，事实自证是指：“让事情自己说话。该理论认为在某些情况下，只要有事件发生的事实就可以推定该案已经有表面证据表明是过失侵权。事实自证是一个规则术语。采用相关间接证据，损害发生的事实就可允许推定过失或推定原告已提出表面证据。可向被告提出对事实的质疑，要求被告予以解释。这只是简单方式用来向陪审团证实事故的相关证据的性质。在得不到解释或其它陪审团认可的证据的情况下，陪审团根据常识和过去的经验，推定事件可能是过失造成的结果。”“…该规则的适用几乎总是假定因果过程的某些部分是已知的，但没有与被告作为或不作为有关联的证据。当控制的事实被用来证明推定被告的过失应承担责任时，当然必须显示在被告控制之下的物实际上引起了损害的发生。在这个意义上，在该规则适用之前，损害的原因必须是已知的。”“该规则是使特定案件中原告确认被告可能是过失的间接证据的合适形式。…”而根据该辞典，直接证据是指：“基于个人知识或观察的证据，或不须推定就能证明真实事实的证据。”间接证据是指：“不是基于个人知识或观察的证据，或没有目击证人证言的所有证据。”[4] 根据美国《侵权法（第二次）重述》第328条D规定：事实自证是指：“（1）在下列情况下，可以推定原告所受的伤害是由被告过失引起的：（a）事件必须属于那种没有过失通常不会发生的事件；（b）证据充分排除了其他归责的原因（包括原告和第三人行为）；并且（c）所指的过失在被告应对原告承担义务的范围内；…”[5] 美国著名侵权法学者普罗塞（Prosser）认为典型的事实自证应当是：（1）事件必须是属于那种没有过失通常不会发生的事故；（2）在被告排他性控制下的媒介或器具引起的；（3）不是原告自动行为或共同行为引起的。[6] 二、事实自证规则的构成要件 美国法院承认该规则允许原告没有任何直接证据证明有过失的情况下推定被告为过失，法院适用该规则，至少应满足以下四个条件：[7] 1、原告没有被告行为的直接证据 大多数美国法院坚持原告必须没有与事件有关的被告行为的直接证据。事实自证规则只
求职英语简历模板(中英版)
一、国家及校级奖项、称号国家奖学金National Scholarship 国家励志奖学金 National Encouragement scholarship 三好学生标兵 Pacemaker to Merit Student 三好学生 Merit Student 学习优秀生Model Student of Academic Records 突出才能奖Model Student of Outstanding Capacity 先进个人 Advanced Individual/Outstanding Student 优秀工作者Excellent staff 优秀学生干部 Excellent Student Cadre 优秀共青团员 Excellent League Member 优秀毕业生Outstanding Graduates 优秀志愿者Outstanding V olunteer 先进班集体Advanced Class 优秀团干 Outstanding League Cadres 学生协会优秀干部 Outstanding cadres of Student Association 学生协会工作优秀个人 Outstanding Individual of Student Association 精神文明先进个人 Spiritual Advanced Individual 社会工作先进个人 Advanced Individual of Social Work 文体活动先进个人 Advanced Individual of Cultural and sports activities 道德风尚奖Ethic Award
浅析我国国家赔偿法归责原则
浅析我国国家赔偿法归责原则 [摘要]1995年1月1日正式实施的《中华人民共和国国家赔偿法》，在我国法制史上第一次确立了国家侵权责任制度。由于立法时客观条件的制约，这部法律实施10年来。凸显出许多不合理、不完善之处，现行国家赔偿法的赔偿归责原则体系存在原则与使用间冲突、和国际国家赔偿原则的不协调等缺陷。与民法上的赔偿原则相比，条件过于严格，不利于对被害人的保护，且与国际化趋势不相统一。 [关键词]国家赔偿法；违法责任原则；归责原则；缺陷 国家赔偿制度的建立与完善标志着人类民主与文明的进一步发展，也是法制建立与完善的一个重要标志。从全球上发生首例国家赔偿案件——1873年法国的勃朗戈案，到今天已有100多年的历史。而国家赔偿制度的普遍确立则是在二战之后，是在饱受战争创伤的人民要求和平与民主、呼吁政府切实保障人权的背景下形成的。 各国国家赔偿制度中所确立的归责原则体系直接决定着该国国家赔偿的广度与深度。“归责”一词，最早是在民法学中提出，是指“行为人因其行为或物件致他人损害的事实发生以后，应依据何种根据使其负责……”其实质是一种根据，是把致害行为与赔偿责任连接起来的桥梁。 我国的国家赔偿法实行单一的违法责任原则，国家赔偿分为两大类，一类是行政赔偿，另外一类是刑事赔偿。 一、违法责任原则的优点 首先，违法原则是客观归责原则，避免了过错原则在主观认定方面的困难，便于受害人取得国家赔偿。 其次，违法原则以执行职务违法为承担赔偿责任的前提，排除了对合法行为造成的损害给予赔偿的可能性，有效地区分了国家赔偿责任与国家补偿责任。 再次，违法原则是较为单一的归责原则，简单明了，与违法及过错原则相比，便于实践操作。 最后，违法原则以国家机关及其工作人员执行职务的合法与否作为是否承担