contract liabilities造句
例句與造句
- since different contract liabilities have different natures and features, it is of theoretical and practical significance to define the scope of compensation in a reasonable way for each kind of contract liability
因?yàn)椴煌暮贤?zé)任具有不同的性質(zhì)和特點(diǎn)，合理確定各種不同合同責(zé)任的賠償范圍，在理論和實(shí)務(wù)中具有十分重要的意義。 - nevertheless, the family-based contracting liability system excessively emphasized the situation of our country that is few land and is a big population . thereby, the system restricts the circulation of land
合理的土地制度,宏觀而言,能夠穩(wěn)定社會(huì)、促進(jìn)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展;微觀而言,則可能激發(fā)人類無(wú)限的潛能,使土地這一重要的生產(chǎn)資料發(fā)揮出最大的效益。 - the author thinks that though misrepresentation is a kind of contract liability when the contract exists, civil liabilities of misrepresentation, under most of circumstances, should belong to tort liabilities . ( 2 ) constitutive requirements of civil liabilities of misrepresentation
雖然在存在合同的情況下，虛假陳述是一種合同責(zé)任，但在大多數(shù)場(chǎng)合下，對(duì)虛假陳述承擔(dān)民事責(zé)任的性質(zhì)，應(yīng)以承擔(dān)侵權(quán)責(zé)任更為妥當(dāng)。第二，虛假陳述民事責(zé)任的構(gòu)成要件。 - the theory of contracting liability for negligence, tracing back to roman laws, was first elaborated systematically by jhering, a german . it has been developed rapidly and adopted by the mainland law system, british and american law system and the unified law in international commercial affairs since 20th century
締約過(guò)失責(zé)任理論思想溯自羅馬法，由德國(guó)耶林首次系統(tǒng)闡述，并從20世紀(jì)以來(lái)已迅速擴(kuò)展到大陸法系、英美法系各國(guó)及國(guó)際商事統(tǒng)一法。 - the doctrine of liability fixation on contract damage is deemed as a dual system, in which faulty liability on entering a contract and post-contract liability are subjected to the doctrine of liability for wrongs, and obligation on breach of contract is subjected to the strict liability
對(duì)合同損害賠償責(zé)任的歸責(zé)原則，筆者認(rèn)為應(yīng)實(shí)行過(guò)錯(cuò)責(zé)任與嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的雙軌制體系。即締約過(guò)失責(zé)任和后合同責(zé)任應(yīng)適用過(guò)錯(cuò)責(zé)任原則；違約賠償責(zé)任則應(yīng)適用嚴(yán)格責(zé)任原則。 - It's difficult to find contract liabilities in a sentence. 用contract liabilities造句挺難的
- it was originated from britian, kter on got swift development in u . s . a, went through contract liability, negligence liability, assurance liability and strict liability, change over from the early contract law field to the morden kw of tort field, became one of the rektively independent and important field of kw of tort gradually . with development of the global economy and trade, the product liability becomes one of the questions that the various countries pay close attention to day by day, the product liability legal system of our country has been set up tentatively, but legal system itself and its concret legal provisions also remain to be perfect, as to the level and degree of protection of consumer, there's certain disparity in american-european country rektively
它起源于英國(guó)，后來(lái)在美國(guó)得到迅猛的發(fā)展，歷經(jīng)契約責(zé)任、疏忽責(zé)任、擔(dān)保責(zé)任和嚴(yán)格責(zé)任，從早期的合同法領(lǐng)域轉(zhuǎn)入到現(xiàn)代侵權(quán)法領(lǐng)域，逐漸成為侵權(quán)法的一個(gè)重要而相對(duì)獨(dú)立的領(lǐng)域，隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)和貿(mào)易發(fā)展的全球化，產(chǎn)品的國(guó)際流動(dòng)性也在增強(qiáng)，產(chǎn)品責(zé)任逐漸成為各國(guó)日益關(guān)注的問(wèn)題之一。我國(guó)產(chǎn)品責(zé)任法律體系已初步建立，但法律體系自身和具體的法律規(guī)定還有待完善，對(duì)消費(fèi)者保護(hù)的水平和力度，較之歐美國(guó)家還有一定差距。 - this paper systematically examines the connotation and denotation of contract concept by adopting contrast method, and analyzes its applications in the contract law in greater detail . based on this, a conclusion can be drawn : the contract law does not regard contract as static any longer but as a dynamic process which includes offer, acceptance, a contract " s creation, coming into effect, performance and so on, based on which a general contract concept also comes out . besides, the transformation of this concept of contract not only expands the score of the contract liability from the traditional ( mainly refers to the former three contract laws ) liability for breach of contract into a novel system which subsumes liabilities for wrongs in conclusion of contract, anticipatory breach of contract, present breach of contract and post contract liability
本文從比較法的角度較系統(tǒng)地探討了合同概念內(nèi)涵和外延，較詳細(xì)地分析了合同概念在我國(guó)合同法上的運(yùn)用，并由此得出我國(guó)合同法改變了將合同視為一個(gè)靜態(tài)概念的傳統(tǒng)觀念，而將其看作是包含要約、承諾、合同成立、生效、履行等在內(nèi)的動(dòng)態(tài)過(guò)程，并在此基礎(chǔ)上建立了一個(gè)廣義的合同概念；而這一合同觀念的嬗變，不僅拓展了我國(guó)合同責(zé)任的范圍，使我國(guó)合同責(zé)任從傳統(tǒng)(主要是指原三大合同法)的違約責(zé)任拓展成為包括締約過(guò)失責(zé)任、預(yù)期違約責(zé)任、實(shí)際違約責(zé)任和后契約責(zé)任在內(nèi)的全新的合同責(zé)任體系，而且這也是我國(guó)合同責(zé)任的創(chuàng)新制度??締約過(guò)失責(zé)任、預(yù)期違約責(zé)任和后契約責(zé)任存在的前提和基礎(chǔ)。 - this paper systematically examines the connotation and denotation of contract concept by adopting contrast method, and analyzes its applications in the contract law in greater detail . based on this, a conclusion can be drawn : the contract law does not regard contract as static any longer but as a dynamic process which includes offer, acceptance, a contract " s creation, coming into effect, performance and so on, based on which a general contract concept also comes out . besides, the transformation of this concept of contract not only expands the score of the contract liability from the traditional ( mainly refers to the former three contract laws ) liability for breach of contract into a novel system which subsumes liabilities for wrongs in conclusion of contract, anticipatory breach of contract, present breach of contract and post contract liability
本文從比較法的角度較系統(tǒng)地探討了合同概念內(nèi)涵和外延，較詳細(xì)地分析了合同概念在我國(guó)合同法上的運(yùn)用，并由此得出我國(guó)合同法改變了將合同視為一個(gè)靜態(tài)概念的傳統(tǒng)觀念，而將其看作是包含要約、承諾、合同成立、生效、履行等在內(nèi)的動(dòng)態(tài)過(guò)程，并在此基礎(chǔ)上建立了一個(gè)廣義的合同概念；而這一合同觀念的嬗變，不僅拓展了我國(guó)合同責(zé)任的范圍，使我國(guó)合同責(zé)任從傳統(tǒng)(主要是指原三大合同法)的違約責(zé)任拓展成為包括締約過(guò)失責(zé)任、預(yù)期違約責(zé)任、實(shí)際違約責(zé)任和后契約責(zé)任在內(nèi)的全新的合同責(zé)任體系，而且這也是我國(guó)合同責(zé)任的創(chuàng)新制度??締約過(guò)失責(zé)任、預(yù)期違約責(zé)任和后契約責(zé)任存在的前提和基礎(chǔ)。 - the author thinks that though civil liabilities of information disclosure is a kind of contract liability when the contract exists, it is better to be treated as a kind of tort liabilities for the follow reasons : firstly, the foundation for civil liabilities of information disclosure is the breach of legal obligations, not contract obligation; secondly, tort liabilities is more conducive to the protection of investors " interests; thirdly, contract liability is not helpful in establishing a uniform civil liabilities system of information disclosure, because there are no contract exit in securities trading under most of circumstances, in this situation people can only get the protection by tort liabilities; last, tort liabilities is a great help in adhering to the principle of good faith
第二章信息披露的法律性質(zhì)。關(guān)于信息披露民事責(zé)任的法律性質(zhì)，雖然在某些情況下契約責(zé)任成立，但筆者認(rèn)為信息披露民事責(zé)任的性質(zhì)，還是采侵權(quán)責(zé)任說(shuō)為妥當(dāng)。因?yàn)椋旱谝?，信息披露民事?zé)任的產(chǎn)生是基于法定義務(wù)的違反，而非契約義務(wù)的違反；第二，侵權(quán)責(zé)任較契約責(zé)任擴(kuò)大了承擔(dān)責(zé)任的主體范圍，更有利于保護(hù)投資者；第三，合同法理論救濟(jì)，潛在地破壞了信息披露民事責(zé)任體系的一體化。 - the author thinks that though civil liabilities of information disclosure is a kind of contract liability when the contract exists, it is better to be treated as a kind of tort liabilities for the follow reasons : firstly, the foundation for civil liabilities of information disclosure is the breach of legal obligations, not contract obligation; secondly, tort liabilities is more conducive to the protection of investors " interests; thirdly, contract liability is not helpful in establishing a uniform civil liabilities system of information disclosure, because there are no contract exit in securities trading under most of circumstances, in this situation people can only get the protection by tort liabilities; last, tort liabilities is a great help in adhering to the principle of good faith
第二章信息披露的法律性質(zhì)。關(guān)于信息披露民事責(zé)任的法律性質(zhì)，雖然在某些情況下契約責(zé)任成立，但筆者認(rèn)為信息披露民事責(zé)任的性質(zhì)，還是采侵權(quán)責(zé)任說(shuō)為妥當(dāng)。因?yàn)椋旱谝唬畔⑴睹袷仑?zé)任的產(chǎn)生是基于法定義務(wù)的違反，而非契約義務(wù)的違反；第二，侵權(quán)責(zé)任較契約責(zé)任擴(kuò)大了承擔(dān)責(zé)任的主體范圍，更有利于保護(hù)投資者；第三，合同法理論救濟(jì)，潛在地破壞了信息披露民事責(zé)任體系的一體化。 - on the basis of the foregoing, the author discovers the similarities of the provisions of two countries : donation contract ( promise ) is generally irrevocable, charitable subscription is enforceable; when circumstances change, donor may refuse to perform the obligations under donation contract under certain circumstances or is excused from contract liability . this paper tries to seek legal culture behind the provisions
在此基礎(chǔ)上，筆者發(fā)現(xiàn)兩國(guó)法律規(guī)定的相似之處：一般的贈(zèng)與合同（允諾）贈(zèng)與人可以任意撤銷贈(zèng)與，慈善性捐助合同（允諾）的贈(zèng)與人則不享有任意撤銷權(quán)；當(dāng)情勢(shì)發(fā)生變更，在特定情形下，賦予贈(zèng)與人拒絕履行贈(zèng)與義務(wù)的權(quán)利或者免除合同責(zé)任。 - thanks to the progressive advancement of good faith doctrine in civil and commercial law, a series of contract liabilities such as contract fault liability, liability of anticipatory breach of contract, liability of actual breach of contract, and liability of violation of contractual obligations have been put into the contract law of china on the basis of good faith and trust
基于誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則在民商法中的逐步推進(jìn)，以誠(chéng)信和信賴為基礎(chǔ)，我國(guó)《合同法》中已規(guī)定了締約過(guò)失責(zé)任、預(yù)期違約責(zé)任、實(shí)際違約責(zé)任和違反后合同責(zé)任等一系列合同責(zé)任。 - compared to the regulations of administrative responsibility and criminal responsibility, the regulations on sponsors " civil liability is too weak in our company act, which lacks of the sponsors " contract liability, liability to make registered capital in full, liability to pay compensation, system of finding out sponsors " liability and similar sponsors " liability etc . because chinese law belongs to continent law system, our company act should fortify civil liability of similar sponsors and that of sponsors " when the company is founded in success or in failure . in the case the company is founded in success, our company act should regulate sponsors " compensation liability to the company, liability to make registered capital in full, contract liability and compensation liability to the third person more specifically . in the case the company is founded in failure, our company act should regulate sponsors " civil liability on company " s foundation being declared invalid, contract liability and liability on establishing actions more definitely
公司立法應(yīng)在考慮我國(guó)系屬大陸法系的現(xiàn)實(shí)情況下，以強(qiáng)化發(fā)起人民事責(zé)任為中心，依照大陸法系的做法將發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任分為公司成立時(shí)的責(zé)任、公司不能成立時(shí)的責(zé)任以及類似da碩士掌位論文master’stlfesis發(fā)起人的責(zé)任加以完善：于公司成立的情形下充實(shí)發(fā)起人對(duì)公司的損害賠償責(zé)任，增設(shè)發(fā)起人的資本充實(shí)責(zé)任、對(duì)第三人的合同責(zé)任以及損害賠償責(zé)任；于公司不能成立的情形下明確公司設(shè)立無(wú)效時(shí)發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任，增設(shè)發(fā)起人的合同責(zé)任并充實(shí)發(fā)起人的設(shè)立行為責(zé)任；此外，為克服前兩種情形下關(guān)于發(fā)起人民事責(zé)任的規(guī)定對(duì)善意信賴的社會(huì)公眾利益保護(hù)不利的弊端，還應(yīng)增設(shè)類似發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任。 - compared to the regulations of administrative responsibility and criminal responsibility, the regulations on sponsors " civil liability is too weak in our company act, which lacks of the sponsors " contract liability, liability to make registered capital in full, liability to pay compensation, system of finding out sponsors " liability and similar sponsors " liability etc . because chinese law belongs to continent law system, our company act should fortify civil liability of similar sponsors and that of sponsors " when the company is founded in success or in failure . in the case the company is founded in success, our company act should regulate sponsors " compensation liability to the company, liability to make registered capital in full, contract liability and compensation liability to the third person more specifically . in the case the company is founded in failure, our company act should regulate sponsors " civil liability on company " s foundation being declared invalid, contract liability and liability on establishing actions more definitely
公司立法應(yīng)在考慮我國(guó)系屬大陸法系的現(xiàn)實(shí)情況下，以強(qiáng)化發(fā)起人民事責(zé)任為中心，依照大陸法系的做法將發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任分為公司成立時(shí)的責(zé)任、公司不能成立時(shí)的責(zé)任以及類似da碩士掌位論文master’stlfesis發(fā)起人的責(zé)任加以完善：于公司成立的情形下充實(shí)發(fā)起人對(duì)公司的損害賠償責(zé)任，增設(shè)發(fā)起人的資本充實(shí)責(zé)任、對(duì)第三人的合同責(zé)任以及損害賠償責(zé)任；于公司不能成立的情形下明確公司設(shè)立無(wú)效時(shí)發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任，增設(shè)發(fā)起人的合同責(zé)任并充實(shí)發(fā)起人的設(shè)立行為責(zé)任；此外，為克服前兩種情形下關(guān)于發(fā)起人民事責(zé)任的規(guī)定對(duì)善意信賴的社會(huì)公眾利益保護(hù)不利的弊端，還應(yīng)增設(shè)類似發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任。 - compared to the regulations of administrative responsibility and criminal responsibility, the regulations on sponsors " civil liability is too weak in our company act, which lacks of the sponsors " contract liability, liability to make registered capital in full, liability to pay compensation, system of finding out sponsors " liability and similar sponsors " liability etc . because chinese law belongs to continent law system, our company act should fortify civil liability of similar sponsors and that of sponsors " when the company is founded in success or in failure . in the case the company is founded in success, our company act should regulate sponsors " compensation liability to the company, liability to make registered capital in full, contract liability and compensation liability to the third person more specifically . in the case the company is founded in failure, our company act should regulate sponsors " civil liability on company " s foundation being declared invalid, contract liability and liability on establishing actions more definitely
公司立法應(yīng)在考慮我國(guó)系屬大陸法系的現(xiàn)實(shí)情況下，以強(qiáng)化發(fā)起人民事責(zé)任為中心，依照大陸法系的做法將發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任分為公司成立時(shí)的責(zé)任、公司不能成立時(shí)的責(zé)任以及類似da碩士掌位論文master’stlfesis發(fā)起人的責(zé)任加以完善：于公司成立的情形下充實(shí)發(fā)起人對(duì)公司的損害賠償責(zé)任，增設(shè)發(fā)起人的資本充實(shí)責(zé)任、對(duì)第三人的合同責(zé)任以及損害賠償責(zé)任；于公司不能成立的情形下明確公司設(shè)立無(wú)效時(shí)發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任，增設(shè)發(fā)起人的合同責(zé)任并充實(shí)發(fā)起人的設(shè)立行為責(zé)任；此外，為克服前兩種情形下關(guān)于發(fā)起人民事責(zé)任的規(guī)定對(duì)善意信賴的社會(huì)公眾利益保護(hù)不利的弊端，還應(yīng)增設(shè)類似發(fā)起人的民事責(zé)任。