tort 中文意思是什麼

tort 解釋
n. 名詞 【法律】侵權行為。

  1. Sticking to the basic animus of tort law, grounding fundamental situation of our country and absorbing foreign useful theoretic productions and legislative experience properly, we relate the essence, types, responsibilities and types of tortfeasors of joint torts together organically. and the combination of them form a new and scientific institution of joint torts corresponding to today ' s social life

    在堅持侵權行為法根本宗旨的前提下，針對我國的基本國情，適當借鑒國外有益的理論成果和立法經驗，從共同侵權行為的本質、類型、責任及行為人的種類等方面來入手，將創門有機地統一起來，就構成了新的科學的符合當今社會生活的共同侵權行為制度。
  2. The appearance that has a few oppressive people also does not violate the tort with right ground certainly, if barefaced ground breaks the law, organic of course meeting goes to law

    有一些壓迫人的現象也並不一定就違法地對之侵權，假如公然地違法，當然就有機會訴諸法律。
  3. Report from our correspondent ( yan qiao of reporter bavin wei ) bubbling with noise international record company appeals to baidu one case, there was a finish eventually yesterday : beijing is advanced people court make final judgment adjudicate, the whole suit of 5 record company that rejects organization of association of international record trade appeals to beg, baidu not tort, do not assume any liability to pay compensation

    本報訊（記者柴偉顏喬）沸沸揚揚的國際唱片公司訴百度一案，昨天終于有了一個了結：北京市高級人民法院做出終審判決，駁回國際唱片業協會組織的5家唱片公司全部訴訟訴求，百度不侵權，不承擔任何賠償責任。
  4. Finally, delivery of cargo without original bills of lading promote the development of shipping in a way in practice, it has reasonability in existence. chapter three is writer ' s study for 10 leading cases of chinese maritime court and court of cassation concerning delivery of cargo without original bills of lading, writer conclude as follows : chinese courts are inclined to regard it as breach of contract but not in tort in judicial practice ; chinese courts allow the plaintiff to choose to sue in tort or of breach ; chinese courts have abandoned the viewpoint of " who holder the bills who must have the right to sue " or " who holder the bills who must win the case " ; and in many cases concerning delivery of cargo without original bills of lading, the court ignored plaintiff ' s actions against the carrier, it proved that carrier can escape reasonability of delivery of cargo without original bills of lading in some cases

    第三章論述我國海事法院及其上級法院就無單放貨案件審理的司法審判實踐研究，通過對十個法院判例的分析、歸納，筆者認為，在司法實踐中，法院越來越傾向于將無單放貨糾紛視為運輸合同糾紛處理，而不認定為侵權行為糾紛；法院允許原告起訴時以侵權起訴或違約起訴作出選擇；法院對提單持有人的訴權認定，已經不採用「誰持有提單誰就有訴權」與「誰持有提單就能保證勝訴」的觀點；有諸多的無單放貨的訴訟案例以被法院駁回起訴為結局，證明了無單放貨在特定情況下的合理性以及承運人有避免承擔責任的可能性。
  5. A study of the causation in environment tort liability

    論環境侵權責任中的因果關系
  6. Study of causation presumption in environmental tort

    環境侵權視野下的因果關系推定
  7. The restriction has its origins in the ancient common law crime and tort of champerty and maintenance

    此限制源於古時普通法罪行及包攬訴訟與維持有關行為乃侵權行為。
  8. B. s. markesinis and s. f. deakin, tort law, 4tth edition, ( clarendon press, oxford ), p36

    克雷斯蒂安?馮?巴爾: 《歐洲比較侵權法》 ，張新寶譯，法律出版社2001年版，第183頁
  9. On construction of public compensative relieving system in environment tort

    論環境侵權之公共賠償救濟制度的構建
  10. The cause is that depending strength of government only to hit lawless proprietor and safeguard consumer ' s leigitimate rights and interests is limited, because the proprietor can constringe the action of self due to the government strike it strongly in the short - term, but government can not be persisted over a long period of time because of the restriction of resources such as funds etc. in another aspect, if encouraging consumer to safeguard the leigitimate rights and interests of self, the probability that proprietor ' s tort occurs could reduce generally, moreover it is lasting

    本文首先從靜態的角度來分析消費者權益受到損害的原因。通過分析發現，單純地依靠政府的力量來打擊不法經營者、維護消費者合法權益的作用是有限的，短期中經營者會因為政府加大打擊力度而收斂自己的行為，但政府由於受經費等資源的限制，不可能長期堅持下去。從另一個角度，如果鼓勵消費者維護自身的合法權益，則經營者侵權行為發生的概率會降低，而且具有持久性。
  11. Although judicial practice also can remedy environmental tort from right of the person and right of property at present, it make the original legal system contused, make common person ' s illusion, distort the environmental right, make it not to further progress, they are not benefit for strengthening our country ' s legal system and realizing society rule by law

    因為環境權的定性問題一日不解決，對環境侵權的制裁則師出無名，盡管目前我國司法實踐中從財產權、人身權的角度尚可救濟環境權受到侵害的行為，但這已然引起了原有法律體系的混亂，造成一般民眾的錯覺，同時也扭曲了環境權，使之不能進一步發展，這是極不利於當代我國法制的健全及法治社會的實現的。
  12. This thesis makes a few tentative explorations in these respects of constituted requisites, subjects, ways and reasons for counterplea of liability for news tort

    其次，較為全面地探討了新聞侵權民事責任的歸責原則、構成要件等基本理論問題。
  13. To the extent permitted by law, in no event shall ups, its affiliates, licensors, suppliers or any third parties mentioned at the web site be liable for any incidental, indirect, exemplary, punitive and or consequential damages, lost profits, and or damages resulting from lost data or business interruption resulting from the use of and or inability to use the web site, the ups systems, information, services or the content whether based on warranty, contract, tort, delict, or any other legal foundation, and whether or not ups is advised of the possibility of such damages

    在法律允許的范圍內，在任何情況下，對因使用或未能使用本網站ups系統服務內容或資訊而產生的任何偶然的間接的典型的懲罰性的或因果性的損害利潤損失或因資料丟失或商業中斷導致的損害， ups及其附屬公司許可人供應商或在本網站提及的任何第三方，不向您承擔責任，無論該損害是基於保證合同侵權行為不法行為或其他法律理論而提出的，即使ups事先被告知該損害的可能性也不承擔責任。
  14. To the extent permitted by law, in no event shall ups, its affiliates, licensors, suppliers or any third parties mentioned at the web site be liable for any incidental, indirect, exemplary, punitive andor consequential damages, lost profits, andor damages resulting from lost data or business interruption resulting from the use of andor inability to use the web site, the ups systems, information, services or the content whether based on warranty, contract, tort, delict, or any other legal foundation, and whether or not ups is advised of the possibility of such damages

    在法律允許的范圍內，在任何情況下，對因使用或未能使用本網站、 ups系統、服務、內容或信息而產生的任何偶然的、間接的、典型的、懲罰性的或因果性的損害、利潤損失或因資料丟失或商業中斷導致的損害， ups及其附屬公司、許可人、供貨商或在本網站提及的任何第三方，不向您承擔責任，無論該損害是基於保證、合同、侵權行為、不法行為或其它法律理論而提出的，即使ups事先被告知該損害的可能性也不承擔責任。
  15. To the extent permitted by law, in no event shall ups, or its affiliates, principals, suppliers or any third parties mentioned at my ups be liable for any incidental, indirect, exemplary, punitive andor consequential damages, lost profits, andor damages resulting from lost data or business interruption resulting from the use of or inability to use my ups, the ups systems, services, content or information, whether based on warranty, contract, tort, delict, or any other legal foundation, and whether or not ups is advised of the possibility of such damages

    在法律允許的范圍內，在任何情況下，對因使用或未能使用「我的ups 」 、 ups系統、服務、內容或信息而產生的任何偶然的、間接的、典型的、懲罰性的或因果性的損害、利潤損失或因資料丟失或商業中斷導致的損害， ups及其附屬公司、許可人、供貨商或在「我的ups 」提及的任何第三方，不向您承擔責任，無論該損害是基於保證、合同、侵權行為、不法行為或其他法律理論而提出的，即使ups事先被告知該損害的可能性也不承擔責任。
  16. The last part expounds the determination and the dispensation of the tort of business name

    第四部分商號侵權行為的認定及處理
  17. User explicitly acknowledges and agrees that, except as expressly provided in the preceding paragraph, to the fullest extent allowed by law, hktb shall not be obligated or liable for any direct damages, contract damages, indirect damages, incidental damages, consequential damages, special damages, exemplary damages, warranty, tort including negligence damages, product liability damages or liabilities including, but not limited to, loss of digital content, prints, digital storage media, revenue and or profit, etc damages arising with respect to your use of discoverhongkong. com e - invites and the service, even if we have been advised or have knowledge of the possibility of such damages

    用戶明確確認及同意，除非前文各段有明確規定，否則在法律許可的最大限度下，香港旅遊發展局無需就閣下使用discoverhongkong . com e請卡及本服務而引起的任何直接損害賠償合約損害賠償間接損害賠償附帶損害賠償相應損害賠償特別損害賠償懲罰性損害賠償保證侵權包括疏忽損害賠償產品責任損害賠償或法律責任包括但不限於數碼內容列印本數碼儲存媒體收益及或利潤的損失而承擔任何責任，即使香港旅遊發展局已獲知會或已知悉該等損害賠償的可能性亦然。
  18. As a special kind of tort liability, the special assuming ways, excuses of exemption and extinctive prescription of the vicarious liability of employers are also analyzed in this discourse

    作為一種特殊侵權責任，僱主轉承責任有其特殊的承擔方式、免責事由和訴訟時效，本文也對其進行了分析。
  19. The third part of this article mainly discusses the causal relationship in market manipulation, which is a block of the enforcement of the law against market fraudulences. because market manipulation is a kind of special tort, the author agree on the use of the " proof to the contrary " theory to lighten the proof burden of the damaged party in causal relationship. besides, this part also discusses such issues as how to decide the scope of legal plaintiffs, how to assess the losses of the damaged party

    本文第三部分「操縱市場的因果關系研究」從民法一般的因果關系理論入手，並結合操縱市場的侵權行為中因果關系的特殊性，論述了操縱市場的侵權行為中因果關系是否成立的判斷標準，並主張對因果關系在民事訴訟中舉證責任的分配應突破「法律要件分類說」的要求，適用因果關系舉證責任倒置的做法，即由操縱市場案件中的被告負擔證明責任成立因果關系不成立的舉證責任，否則即推定因果關系成立。
  20. Others have allowed tort suits against insurers for negligent delay in acting on an application.

    另一些州則允許因保險人遲遲未能對投保書採取行動而對他提起侵權之訴。
分享友人
分享到 Line

分享到臉書