大陸法（法律體系）法學外文翻譯

1、<p>　　2000英文單詞，1.1萬英文字符，3500漢字</p><p><b>　　畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯</b></p><p>　　Civil law (legal system)</p><p>　　Abstract: This article is concerned with the legal system known a

2、s Civil law. For the area of law in common law countries governing relations between private individuals, see Civil law (common law).</p><p>　　Keywords: Civil law; Common law</p><p>　　Introducti

3、on</p><p>　　Civil law, or continental law, is the predominant system of law in the world, with its origins in Roman law, and sets out a comprehensive system of rules, usually codified, which are applied and

4、interpreted by judges. Modern systems are descendants of the nineteenth century codification movement, during which the most important codes (most prominently the Napoleonic Code and the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB

5、) came into existence.</p><p>　　However, codification is not an essential characteristic of a civil law system. For example, the civil law systems of Scotland and South Africa are not codified, and the civil

6、 law systems of Scandinavian countries remain largely not codified. The civil law system is contrasted with the common law originating in England and generally adopted by those countries of the world with a history as Br

7、itish territories or colonies.</p><p>　　As a body of laws comprising the official legal system of a nation or state, especially in reference to the rights and privileges of private citizens, civil law become

8、s the necessary law in which freedom and necessity are unified.</p><p><b>　　Overview</b></p><p>　　Legal systems across the world. Civil law is blue; other systems are common law (pin

9、k), mixed civil and common law (brown), custom (green) and others (yellow).</p><p>　　Civil or civilian law is a legal tradition which is the base of the law in the majority of countries of the world, especia

10、lly in continental Europe and the former Soviet Union, but also in Quebec (Canada), Louisiana (U.S.), Puerto Rico (a U.S. territory), Japan, Latin America, and most former colonies of continental European countries. The

11、Scottish legal system is usually considered to be a mixed system in that Scots law has a basis in Roman law, combining features of both unmodified and Civil l</p><p><b>　　History</b></p>&

12、lt;p>　　The civil law is based on Roman law, especially the Corpus Juris Civilis of Emperor Justinian, as later developed through the Middle Ages by medieval legal scholars.</p><p>　　The acceptance of Roma

13、n law had different characteristics in different countries. In some of them its effect resulted from legislative act; that is, it became positive law, whereas in other ones it became accepted by way of its processing by

14、legal theorists.</p><p>　　Consequently, Roman law did not completely dominate in Europe. Roman law was a secondary source, which was applied only as long as local customs and local laws lacked a pertinent pr

15、ovision on a particular matter. However, local rules too were interpreted primarily according to Roman law (it being a common European legal tradition of sorts), resulting in its influencing the main source of law also.&

16、lt;/p><p>　　A second characteristic, beyond Roman law foundations, is the extended codification of the adopted Roman law, namely its inclusion into civil codes.</p><p>　　The concept of codification

17、 developed especially during the seventeenth and eighteenth century, as an expression of both Natural Law and the ideas of the Enlightenment. The political ideal of that era was expressed by the concepts of democracy, pr

18、otection of property, and the rule of law. That ideal required the creation of certainty of law, through the recording of law and through its uniformity. So, the aforementioned mix of Roman law and customary and local la

19、w ceased to exist, and the road o</p><p>　　Another factor that contributed to codification was that the notion of the nation state, which was born during the nineteenth century, required the recording of the

20、 law that would be applicable to that state.</p><p>　　Certainly, there was also reaction to the aim of law codification. The proponents of codification regarded it as conducive to certainty, unity, and syste

21、matic recording of the law; whereas its opponents claimed that codification would result in the ossification of the law.</p><p>　　Despite resistance, the codification of European private laws moved forward.

22、The French Napoleonic Code of 1804, the German civil code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) of 1900, and the Swiss codes were the most influential national civil codes.</p><p>　　Because Germany was a rising pow

23、er in the late nineteenth century, when many Asian nations were introducing civil law, the German Civil Code became the basis for their legal systems. Thus Japan and South Korea operate under civil law. In China, the Ger

24、man Civil Code was introduced in the later years of the Qing Dynasty and formed the basis of the law of the Peoples' Republic of China, which remains in force.</p><p>　　Civil law served as the foundation

25、 for socialist law used in Communist countries, with major modifications and additions from Marxist-Leninist ideology. For example, while civil law systems have traditionally put great pains in defining the notion of pri

26、vate property, how it may be acquired, transferred, or lost, Socialist law systems provide for most property to be owned by the state or by agricultural co-operatives, and have special courts and laws for state enterpris

27、es.</p><p><b>　　Subgroups</b></p><p>　　The term "civil law" as applied to a legal tradition actually originates in English-speaking countries, where it was used to group al

28、l non-English legal traditions together and contrast them to the English common law. However, since continental European traditions are by no means uniform, scholars of comparative law usually subdivide civil law into fo

29、ur distinct groups:</p><p>　　French civil law: In France, the Benelux countries, Italy, Spain, and former colonies of those countries; </p><p>　　German civil law: In Germany, Austria, Switzerlan

30、d, Greece, Portugal, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, and the Republic of China; </p><p>　　Scandinavian civil law: In Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Finland, and Iceland inherited the system from their neighbors. &

31、lt;/p><p>　　Chinese law is a mixture of civil law and socialist law. </p><p>　　Portugal, Brazil, and Italy have evolved from French to German influence, as their nineteenth century civil codes were

32、 close to the Napoleonic Code and their twentieth century civil codes are much closer to the German Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. Legal culture and law schools have also come nearer to the German system. The law in these

33、 countries is often said to be of a hybrid nature.</p><p>　　The Dutch law, or at least the Dutch civil code, cannot be easily placed in one of the mentioned groups either, and it has itself influenced the mo

34、dern private law of other countries. The Russian civil code is in part a translation of the Dutch one.</p><p>　　Civil versus common law</p><p>　　Civil law is primarily contrasted against common

35、law, which is the legal system developed among Anglo-Saxon people, especially in England.</p><p>　　The original difference is that, historically, common law was law developed by custom, beginning before ther

36、e were any written laws and continuing to be applied by courts after there were written laws, too, whereas civil law developed out of the Roman law of Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis.</p><p>　　In later

37、times, civil law became codified as druid couturier, or customary law, that were local compilations of legal principles recognized as normative. Sparked by the Age of Enlightenment, attempts to codify private law began d

38、uring the second half of the eighteenth century, but civil codes with a lasting influence were promulgated only after the French Revolution, in jurisdictions such as France (with its Napoleonic Code), Austria, Quebec, Sp

39、ain, the Netherlands, and Germany. However, codific</p><p>　　Thus, the difference between civil law and common law lies not just in the mere fact of codification, but in the methodological approach to codes

40、and statutes. In civil law countries, legislation is seen as the primary source of law. By default, courts thus base their judgments on the provisions of codes and statutes, from which solutions in particular cases are t

41、o be derived. Courts thus have to reason extensively on the basis of general rules and principles of the code, often drawing analogies</p><p>　　The underlying principle of separation of powers is seen somewh

42、at differently in civil law and common law countries. In some common law countries, especially the United States, judges are seen as balancing the power of the other branches of government. By contrast, the original idea

43、 of separation of powers in France was to assign different roles to legislation and to judges, with the latter only applying the law. This translates into the fact that many civil law jurisdictions reject the formalis<

44、;/p><p>　　There are other notable differences between the legal methodologies of various civil law countries. For example, it is often said that common law opinions are much longer and contain elaborate reasoni

45、ng, whereas legal opinions in civil law countries are usually very short and formal in nature. This is in principle true in France, where judges cite only legislation, but not prior case law. (However, this does not mean

46、 that judges do not consider it when drafting opinions.) By contrast, court opin</p><p>　　There are, however, certain sociological differences. Civil law judges are usually trained and promoted separately fr

47、om attorneys, whereas common law judges are usually selected from accomplished and reputable attorneys. Also, the influence of articles by legal academics on case law tends to be much greater in civil law countries.</

48、p><p>　　With respect to criminal procedure, certain civil law systems are based upon a variant of the inquisitorial system rather than the adversarial system. In common law countries, this kind of judicial orga

49、nization is sometimes criticized as lacking a presumption of innocence. Most European countries, however, are parties to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) adopted under the auspices of the Council of Europe

50、in 1950 to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. Article 6 of the ECH</p><p>　　When the presumption of innocence is present, what distinguishes the inquisitorial system is the frequent lack of a jur

51、y of peers, which is guaranteed in many common law jurisdictions. Inquisitorial systems tend to have something akin to a "bench" trial made up of a single judge or a tribunal. Some Scandinavian nations have a t

52、ribunal that consists of one civilian and two trained legal professionals. One result of the inquisitorial system's lack of jury trial is a significant difference in the r</p><p>　　Civil and common law s

53、ystems also differ considerably in criminal procedure. In general, the judge in a civil law system plays a more active role in determining the facts of the case. Most civil law countries investigate major crimes using th

54、e inquisitorial system. Also, civil law systems rely much more on written argument than oral argument.</p><p>　　Economic implications</p><p>　　According to legal origins theory, a controversial

55、idea promoted by economists such as Andrei Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, civil law countries tend to emphasize social stability, while common law countries focus on the rights of an individual. The basic thrust of the t

56、heory is that common law, as opposed to French civil law, and to a lesser degree to German and Scandinavian civil law, is associated with more orientation towards institutions of the market, which is why common law count

57、ries tend</p><p>　　References</p><p>　　Debrusche, Anne-Francoise. 2006. Civil Law Reasoning. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Civil Law Section. </p><p>　　Drummond, Susan G. 2007. Civil

58、 Law Toronto: Osgoode Hall Law School.</p><p>　　Harr, Jonathon. 1995. A Civil Action. New York: Random House. ISBN 0-394-56349-2 </p><p>　　Moustaira, Elina N. 2004. Comparative Law: University C

59、ourses (in Greek). Athens: Ant. N. Sakkoulas Publishers. </p><p><b>　　大陸法（法律體系）</b></p><p>　　［摘要］本文關注的是稱為大陸法體系的法律體系。個人在普通法國家地區(qū)之間的法律關系，見大陸法（普通法）。</p><p>　?。坳P鍵詞］大陸法 普通法<

60、;/p><p><b>　　1 前言</b></p><p>　　成文法，又稱大陸法，是當今世界上最主要的法律制度體系之一。大陸法起源于羅馬法典，并且從開始，便通常被法典化的一個全面體制，是由法官應用和解釋的。</p><p>　　現(xiàn)代的大陸法體系是19世紀法典化法典運動的產物，在期間最重要的法典(最突出地是拿破侖的法典和Bürgerli

61、ches Gesetzbuch (BGB))先后存在。</p><p>　　然而，法典化法典并不是大陸法體系的一個本質特征。 例如，蘇格蘭和南非的法律體系就沒有被法典化，并且斯堪的納維亞國家主要法律體系依然是不被法典化的。 大陸法體系與發(fā)起于英國的英美法體系形成對比，以及一些在歷史上曾經作為英國領土或殖民地的地區(qū)。</p><p>　　作為組成國家官方的合法系統(tǒng)或州的一個法律主體，尤其關于

62、私人市民的權利和特權，大陸法成為自由和需要被統(tǒng)一的必需的法律。</p><p><b>　　2 概觀</b></p><p>　　在世界各地的法律體系。大陸法是藍色的區(qū)域；其他的體系是普通法（粉色），大陸法和普通法混合的體系（棕色），判例法（綠色）和其他法律體系（黃色）。</p><p>　　在多數(shù)國家中，傳統(tǒng)上來說成文法和大陸法是法律的基礎，

63、特別是在歐洲大陸和前蘇聯(lián)，還有其他的一些國家和地區(qū)，如：魁北克(加拿大)，路易斯安那(美國)，波多里哥(美國)。，日本、拉丁美洲和多說歐洲大陸國家的前殖民地等。蘇格蘭法律體系通常認為是一個混合的體系。法律中不僅體現(xiàn)著古羅馬法典，還結合了普通法和大陸法的特點。在美國的西部和西南部，法律在這樣不同的區(qū)域如離婚和水利權都有著利比亞民法的影響，根據分明地不同的原則，從移民者拓殖的東北部的法律是以英國普通法為根源的。</p><

64、;p><b>　　3 歷史</b></p><p>　　大陸法是以羅馬法典為基礎的，特別是東羅馬帝國皇帝制定的法典，和中世紀之后的法定學者開發(fā)發(fā)展而來的。</p><p>　　古羅馬法典采納了不同國家的不同特征，在其中的一些國家里，他的效果起因于立法的行為；即使它成為了制定法，然而經由它處理變成經由其他法定理論家一般的承認。</p><p&g

65、t;　　結果，古羅馬法典并沒有完全控制了歐洲。古羅馬法典是一份二次文獻，地方風俗和地方法律在一件特殊事情上缺乏一個恰當?shù)墓?然而，地方法規(guī)主要根據古羅馬法典(它解釋了共同的歐洲法律傳統(tǒng)的排序)，造成它也影響法律的主要來源。</p><p>　　第二個特征，在古羅馬法典基礎之外，是被采取的古羅馬法典，即它包括的延長到民事規(guī)章里編纂法典。</p><p>　　法典編纂的觀念在十七的和第十八

66、的世紀期間尤其發(fā)展了，當做是自然法則和啟迪的主意的表達。那個時代政治理想由民主、保護物產和法規(guī)的概念表達。 那理想要求法律把握的創(chuàng)作，通過法律和它的均衡。 如此，古羅馬法典和習慣和地方法律的上述的混合停止存在和為法律編纂法典打開的路，對上述的政治理想的目標具有著貢獻。</p><p>　　對編纂法典貢獻的另一個因素是"國家州"的概念，于19世紀期間誕生，要求是可適用的對那個狀態(tài)法律的記錄。&l

67、t;/p><p>　　當然，也有反應到法律編纂法典的目標。 編纂法典的擁護者認為它有助于把握、團結和法律系統(tǒng)的記錄; 而它的反對者聲稱編纂法典將導致法律的死板。</p><p>　　盡管受到抵抗，歐洲法律的法典編纂依然向前發(fā)展著，法國的拿破侖一世 1804 法典， 1900 德國民法 （Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch）和瑞士的法典都是是最有影響的國家民法。</p

68、><p>　　德國是在十九世紀底時實力上升的，當許多亞洲國家正在介紹大陸法的時候，德國大陸法成為了這些亞洲國家合法系統(tǒng)的基礎。如日本和韓國在民法的影響之下。在中國，德國民法在清朝之后的數(shù)年出入中國，中話民國的法律體系，把德國民法作為制法基礎。</p><p>　　大陸法被視為用是共產主義國家的社會主義者的基礎法律，藉由馬克思主義－列寧主義思想的修正和附加。舉例來說，當大陸法體系已經按照傳統(tǒng)地定

69、義，來定義私人財產觀念的時候，它可能被獲得，轉移，或失去，社會主義法律制度因地制宜提供大部分共有財產或者農業(yè)合作，而且為集體企業(yè)制定特別的法規(guī)和法律。</p><p><b>　　4分支</b></p><p>　　“大陸法”應用于法律的傳統(tǒng)實際上是發(fā)起于英文國家，它用于聚集所有非英國法律傳統(tǒng)和對比英國的普通法。然而，由于歐洲大陸的傳統(tǒng)一點也不統(tǒng)一，比較法律的學者通常

70、將其細分為四個分支：</p><p>　　法國民法：在法國、經濟聯(lián)盟國家、意大利、西班牙和那些國家的前殖民地；</p><p>　　德國民法：在德國、奧地利、瑞士、希臘、葡萄牙、土耳其、日本，韓國和中華民國；</p><p>　　北歐民法：在丹麥、挪威和瑞典。芬蘭和冰島繼承了他們的鄰居的法律體系。</p><p>　　中國法律：是民法和社會主

71、義法律的一個結合。</p><p>　　葡萄牙、巴西和意大利已經從法語進展到德語，他們的十九世紀民法接近拿破侖一世的法典，而且他們的二十的世紀民法更比較靠近的到德國 Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch法典。合法的文化和法學院也已經差一點就要和德國體系相同了。在這些國家的法律時常被說為混合體系。</p><p>　　荷蘭法律或者至少荷蘭民事規(guī)章，不可能出現(xiàn)在上面提及的四

72、個分支中，因為它本身就影響著其他國家現(xiàn)代的法律法規(guī)。 俄國的法律便是對荷蘭法律的一部分詮釋。</p><p><b>　　5 大陸法與普通法</b></p><p>　　大陸法與普通法的首先對比，是在昂格魯撒克遜人之中發(fā)展發(fā)展而來的法律體系，尤其是在英國。</p><p>　　二者之間最基本的區(qū)別是，歷史上，普通法是風俗開發(fā)的法律，開始，是在有

73、所有書面法律和繼續(xù)由法院之前申請，在那里制定法律。而民法開發(fā)出基于古羅馬法典的Juris法典。</p><p>　　在之后的一段時期，民法被當作教徒的習慣法，是法律原則地方編輯被認的基準。 在18世紀的中期，開始編撰法律法規(guī)，但民事規(guī)章持久的影響著法國革命，例如法國的法規(guī)(如拿破侖一世法典)，奧地利、魁北克、西班牙、荷蘭和德國之后也公布了各自的法規(guī)。 然而，編纂法典絕不是一個大陸法體系的本質特征。 例如，斯堪的納

74、維亞國家民法系統(tǒng)在美國依然是主要非限定，而普通法司法頻繁地編撰了他們的法律的部分，例如。 一致的商業(yè)法規(guī)。 也有混合的法律系統(tǒng)，例如蘇格蘭、路易斯安那、魁北克、納米比亞和南非的法律。</p><p>　　因此，大陸法和普通法之間的區(qū)別不僅僅在編纂法典上，在方法論法規(guī)和法規(guī)上也有著區(qū)別。 在大陸國家，立法被看作是法律的源頭。 默許情況下，法院根據他們的評斷法律和法規(guī)提示，做出裁決。 法院必須通過廣泛的辯論，得出與法

75、律法規(guī)一般的規(guī)則和原則，從法律提示得出結論。 相反，而法規(guī)只被視為作為參雜在狹義的普通法之中，因而在普通法體系中，判例是法律的主源。</p><p>　　權力的分離的在大陸法和普通法國家中在原則上一些不同。在一些普通法國家中，尤其美國，法官被視為平衡政府其他部門的主要力量。相反地，在法國的權力分離的最初定義將分配給立法和法官不同的角色，只有藉由后者應用于法律。這種轉變在事實上，許多大陸法司法權不考慮判例 （對固定

76、的判例也有適當?shù)膮⒖迹┑男问街髁x觀念, 特定的大陸法體系以詢問者的體系，而非對手的體系為基礎。</p><p>　　需要注意的是大陸法國家與其他法律體系有著各種不同。舉例來說，它時常被說，普通法意見非常長而且包含精細的推論，然而在大陸法國家的合法意見在本質上通常是非常短又正式的。在法國，那里的法官引述唯一的立法大體而言是真實的，但是并不是之前的判例。（然而，這不是指，當起草意見的時候，法官不考慮它。) 相反地，追

77、求在說德語的國家意見可能是像英國的一樣長，廣泛地談論先前的判例和學術文字。</p><p>　　然而，存在著某些社會學區(qū)別。大陸法法官通常被訓練并且分開地被提升與律師，而普通法法官從成功和名聲好的律師通常被挑選。 并且，文章的影響由法院對判例法傾向偉大的大陸法國家。關于犯罪，某些大陸法體系根據詢問者系統(tǒng)的變形。 在普通法國家，這種司法組織有時被批評作為缺乏無罪推定。 然而，多數(shù)歐洲國家在1950年歐洲大會上，人權

78、(ECHR)被采取由歐洲理事會贊助保護人權和根本自由。 ECHR的六個文章保證“公平審理權”和無罪推定。 一些大陸法國家也有把大會日期提前并且鞏固被告無罪推定的立法。</p><p>　　當無罪推定存在時，區(qū)別詢問者系統(tǒng)是頻繁缺乏陪審員，在許多普通法司法被保證。詢問者系統(tǒng)傾向于有事如同到“長凳”試驗組成一位唯一法官或法庭。 一些斯堪的納維亞國家有包括一個平民的一個法庭，并且訓練法學家。 詢問者系統(tǒng)缺乏一個陪審團審

79、訊，是試驗證據規(guī)則上的一個重大區(qū)別。 普通法證據在關心建立陪審員將誤用，或者給不適當?shù)闹亓坎豢煽康淖C據。 在詢問者系統(tǒng)，法學家被認為是能辨認可靠證據的人，證據規(guī)則有時是較不復雜的。 最顯著的是缺乏消息規(guī)則。</p><p>　　大陸法和普通法體系在犯罪認定的客觀上也不同。 一般來說，法官在一個大陸法體系中，裁決案件時扮演著一個更加活躍的角色。 多數(shù)大陸法國家使用詢問者系統(tǒng)調查主要罪行。 并且，大陸法體系書面證據要

80、多于口頭證據。</p><p><b>　　6 經濟意義</b></p><p>　　根據法律起源理論，經濟學家Andrei Shleifer和Robert W. Vishny提出一個理論。普通法國家傾向集中于個人的權利，大陸法國家更傾向于強調社會的穩(wěn)定。理論的基本推力便是普通法，與法國民法和德國斯堪的納維亞民法相對，在市場上可以有更多的取向，這便是為什么普通法國家傾

81、向于是經濟上的發(fā)展。</p><p><b>　　參考文獻</b></p><p>　　Debrusche, Anne-Francoise. 2006. 《民法推論》, 渥太華,渥太華民法大學。</p><p>　　Drummond, Susan G. 2007. 《多倫多民法》，Osgoode 法學院。</p><p>