法律英语试卷.doc

《法律英语试卷.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《法律英语试卷.doc（37页珍藏版）》请在得力文库 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、Four short words sum up what has lifted most successful individuals above the crowd: a little bit more.-author-date法律英语试卷111. To discuss the differences between the civil law system and the common law system. The original places are different. The civil law system originated in ancient Rome, and the

2、 common law system originated in England. The main traditional source of the common law is cases, while the main traditional source of the civil law is legislation. The civil law system pays more attention to substantive law; the common law system pays more attention to procedural rules. The classif

3、ication of law is different. The civil law is separated into public law and private law, the common law is separated into common law and equity. Since theory and doctrines is important in legal education of civil law system, professor plays an important role in legal education. on the contrary, case

4、s is the main source of common law, thus the judges decision is more important. The civil procedure is Adversary system (对抗式诉讼),in common law system ,judges take a relatively passive role. Inquisitorial system（纠问式诉讼）, in civil law countries , judges have the power to investigate the case and inquire

5、 the parties and the witnesses.2. To discuss the main differences between American and Chinese law school teaching. Law is an undergraduate degree in the china, while in the us is postgraduate degree. The teaching methodIn USA, the teaching method is case method or Socratic method, students instead

6、of the professors play an active role in the class.In China, the professor exposes the law to his students, who take notes and do not intervene in class. Cases vs. DoctrinesIn the USA, students textbook contains lots of cases and decisions made by the judges.In China, The textbook involves many doct

7、rines, concepts and theories.3.To discuss the main features of the American court systemThere are fifty-two court systems in the U.S. each state has its own system of courts, one for the District of Columbia and a federal system. In the state court systems, court structures vary from state to state.

8、 But they all exhibit a hierarchical structure; decisions of lower courts may be reviewed by higher courts. A state system includes:1) Trial courts of inferior jurisdiction 2) trial courts of general jurisdiction3) appellate courtsThe trial courts of inferior jurisdiction hear civil litigations invo

9、lving small amounts of money and minor violations of the criminal law. While the trial courts of general jurisdiction can hear all kinds of cases. Every case should first be heard at the trial court. Then it can be appealed to the appellate court. Every state has its court of last resort.The structu

10、re of the federal system is similar. There are three levels of courts: (1) U.S. district courts (2) U.S. courts of appeals (3) the United States Supreme Court. Not like the other courts in federal systems which are created by congress, the Supreme Court is created by Constitution. There are a few sp

11、ecialized federal courts4.To discuss the significance of jurisdiction.First, it can enable the participants to institute a legal proceeding in a specific way. Next, it makes justice understand the whole case easily. It is convenient for the parties take part in the litigation.Finally, save legal res

12、ources and smooth the legal proceedings.5. To discuss the main characteristics of case law. it can ensure the consistence of decisions .Known also as the principle of stare dicisis. Past judicial decisions are formally and generally binding for similar cases.Some precedents have greater weight than

13、others. The weight of precedent is affected by the ranking of court that decided it. Once a prior decision has been overruled, it continues to bind the particular parties; it is no longer authoritative to the subsequent cases.a court is not bound to follow another states precedents, but it will cons

14、ider the outstate decisions and, if their reasoning is persuasive, it can make use of them. 6. To discuss the significance of case Marbury vs. Madison. it is a landmark case in the United States. It formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review.In this case, Chief Justice Marshall ruled that

15、the Supreme Court could not grant relief to the plaintiff Marbury because it did not has the jurisdiction of the case. This satisfied the immediate concerns of the Republicans and sidestepped the controversy, but the great significance of the case lay in the Courts assumption that it has the final a

16、uthority to determine whether any act is constitutional., thus, profoundly enhancing the Courts authority.the case was the first strong pronouncement of the principle of judicial review, which is the power of the Court to examine legislation and other acts of Congress. In a word, the case establishe

17、d the principle of judicial review , which has been a permanent and indispensable feature of United States constitutional system. So the constitutional scholars, by consensus, regard the case as the most important case the Supreme Court ever has decided.7. The main differences between substantive la

18、w and procedural law.Procedural law define the form and method by which legal rights are enforced. While substantive law define the legal rights themselves. The differences are as follows: They contain different rules and substances. Substantive law provides for the rules about duties or rights. Whi

19、le procedural law sets rules about form or method. Although “pure” substantive rules and “pure” procedural rules exist, many rules are a mixture of both substance and procedure. Some rules seem to be procedural are adopted for substantive reasons; likewise, some rules seem to be substantive are adop

20、ted for procedural reasons. procedural law generally have more efficiency considerations.8. Whether the death penalty should be abolished in America. The Court points out that the use of the death penalty has a long history of acceptance both in the US and in England , and it is apparent from the Co

21、nstitution that the existence of capital punishment was accepted by the Framers. In the mean time we should assure that death penalty will not be wantonly imposed.it can be justified from the following grounds:(i) as a means of retribution against severe crimes (ii) as a deterrent to others;(iii) to

22、 prevent the criminal from re-offending; (iv) its cheaper than keeping people in prison. It is not humanitarian .Opponents may argue:(i) killing someone is always wrong, and two wrongs can never make a right; (v) mistakes are bound to happen, if you kill someone innocent , you can never correct this

23、 wrong .9. To discuss the importance of Miranda warning Miranda warning is a warning that is required to be given by police in the United States to criminal suspects in police custody before they are interrogated to inform them about their constitutional rights It includes theright toremain silent;

24、being clearly informed of that anything the person says will be used against that person incourt; the right to consult with anattorneyand to have that attorney present during questioning, if he or she isindigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent her or him.1.Miranda warning guara

25、ntees the constitutional rights of suspects during the criminal investigation. Those rights are mainly from the fifth and sixth amendments.2.Due to this warning , suspects are well aware of their rights ,therefore, they can prevent the police from harming their legal rights.3.Miranda warning also he

26、lp the suspects understand that he does not have the responsibility to self-incriminate.4.It guarantees that an indigent suspect has access to the help of an attorney. In this sense, whether the suspects are poor or not, they will receive equitable treatment.10. To discuss the function of voir dire

27、The voir dire is the process used to select a jury.The prospectivejurorsare questioned about their backgrounds and potentialbiasesbefore being chosen into ajury. The function is to select a jury acceptable to both sides. Jurors are excluded by two methods: peremptory challenge: exclude a juror witho

28、ut having to specify a reason. and the challenge for cause.: we must demonstrate that the individual cannot be impartial or cannot handle the responsibility of making a rational decision.Jurors can be excluded by these reasons:1)have already formed an opinion about the guilt or innocence of the accu

29、sed;2)are related to any of the parties or legal actors in the case; 3)are physically or mentally impaired to the extent that the impairment will interfere with their decision-making process or4) are considered to be incapable of remaining impartial until the case is presented.11. To discuss what th

30、e appellate courts focus on and whether it is proper Appellate courts review the action of the lower judicial tribunals. Actually, the scope of judicial review is relatively narrow; it does not retry the case on the merits, and it does not substitute its idea of justice for those of the trial court;

31、 what it does is to review the record of the proceedings to determine whether the lower court committed error on its procedure or in applying the substantive law to the facts of the case.They will only look at such documents: the pleadings, the transcript of testimony, the exhibits entered into tria

32、l and the trial courts decisions. No additional testimony is taken. No new evidence is submitted.In most states, there are two kinds of appellate court, the intermediate appellate court and the court of last resort. If everyone appeals their cases to a higher court, the appellate courts workload wil

33、l be tremendous, therefore, it is necessary to set up an intermediate appellate court.In my opinion, it is necessary to restrict the scope of judicial review. If the appellate courts retry every case, it would be a waste of judicial resources and make them unable to give their full attention to the

34、novel and socially important controversies. 12. Whats the differences between the torts and crimes? NatureA crime is considered to be a wrong against the whole society, whereas a tort is a wrong against an individual. The persons who actually prosecute the case.When crimes occur, State prosecutors/d

35、istrict attorneys. For tort claims, the injured party will prosecute the case. Punishments One who commits a crime may be subject to such punishments as death penalty, imprisonment, forfeiture and fines. Except for fines, the above remedies are not available in tort law; compensatory damages and pun

36、itive damages are the most common punishments.However, some acts or omissions may be both criminal offenses and tortious ones. For instance, if one individual intentionally punches somebody, a crime may be committed, and the injured party will sue the defendant in a civil action.13. To discuss the p

37、rocess of the creation of case law As the name “case law” suggests, a collection of particular decisions, generate rules of general application, namely case law.From the point of view of parties to a lawsuit, what matters is the immediate outcome. However, in the view of judges, lawyers, the decisio

38、ns take on broader perspective. Later judges will look to prior, similar decisions.It is a feature of the common law system that past judicial decisions are formally and generally binding for the disposition of similar present controversies. However, if a former decision has been overruled by a high

39、er court, it is no longer authoritative to subsequent cases.A series of decisions of former cases does not of course in itself constitute a system of law. But rules of law arise sooner or later out of such decisions. When such rules are taken as normative for future disputes, we have a legal system

40、of precedent.There is also another factor affecting this process: sense of justice requires that all men are treated alike in like circumstances.14. To discuss the differences between the binding precedents and persuasive precedents Binding precedent is the precedent that a court must follow (it is

41、law). There are two requirements must be met: these former decisions are in the same jurisdiction as that court. And the courts which rendered these decisions are in the same level as that court or higher. In contrast, persuasive precedent is precedent that a court need not follow (it is not law, ma

42、y be persuasive because it suggests a line of reasoning and can be made use of as guidance and justification). All prior judicial decisions outside of that courts jurisdiction or from a lower court are considered to be persuasive only.15. To discuss the different roles of judge and attorneys in cour

43、tFirst of all, judges have authority to decide questions of law and fact in civil law system and only question of law in common law system. Attorneys only have right to show their evidence to convince the judges, but cant decide cases at last. Second, the status is different. Judges have educational

44、 background, experiences and power to decide cases finally. So judges are more respectable and get more honor in court. Attorneys are legal practitioner, only can advise judge and jury how to decide cases. So they are inferior to judges in court.16. To discuss whether it is reasonable to choose comm

45、on people as jurorsIt is reasonable to choose common people as jurors. With the participation of common people, the trial will become more impartial, because its more difficult to bribe the jurors than the judges. We can avoid the professional prejudice of the judges in the trial, which is formed in

46、 the long-term adjudication. It also reflects the democratization in the judicial system. But common people may be too emotional and sensitive. These will affect their judgments about a specific case.Compared with experts, they are easier to be misled by lawyers.17. To discuss the differences betwee

47、n motive and intent Motive and intent have different legal meanings. Motive is the cause or reason that moves the will and induces action. It represents the stimulus for behavior. Intent relates to the state of mind at the time of the commission of the unlawful act. the prosecutor is not required to

48、 prove the defendants motive for behavior and the failure to do so does not mean the jury will vote for acquittal.And failures to establish an unlawful intent almost certainly result in acquittal. the motive may help to establish a justifiable reason for the illegal behavior. But a good motive does not necessarily acquit the suspect. 18. To discuss the significance of the case Furman vs. Georgia It is a mile stone in American histo