法律英语（期中复习概览）Units1,2,36
Revision 1 (for Units 1-2-3-6)
I. 课程评价（《法律英语》课程标准）
1．这门课程的评价依据是本课程标准规定的课程目标、教学内容和要求，该门课程采用平时考核（30%）、集中考试（70%）相结合的形式进行。
2．集中考试说明
1）考试时间：120分钟。
2）考试方式、分制与分数解释bitch啥意思
采用闭卷、笔试的方式，以百分制评分，60分为及格，满分为100分。有可能的话，把形成性评价与终结性评价结合起来。
3）题型比例
词义解释（配对）题15%；词语填空题15%；判断正误题20%；简答题20%；完形填空题15%；案例分析题15%。
4）样题与目标定位示例
I．词义解释[wqguo1]（配对）题：（着重考查学生对法律专用词汇的掌握情况）
Example：Match the words in column A with the corresponding definitions in Column B.
A B
complainant the ttling of a ca or dispute by judicial procedure
adjudication the party that makes a complaint or files a formal charge, as in a court of law
II．词语填空题[wqguo2]：（着重考查学生对法律用语和搭配的掌握程度）
Example：Fill up the gaps with the appropriate words or phras given. Change the forms where necessary.
trespass, liable to, subscribe to, liable for, be convicted of, subject (vt.), appropriate, divergence, conducive to, contingent |
|
1. All drivers are _________ the driving rules and regulations.
6级改革
2. The minister was found to ___________ a large sum of government money.
III．判断正误题[wqguo3]中文译德文：（着重考查学生对法律基本知识的理解程度）
Example：Decide whether each statement is true or fal according to the legal knowledge you have learned and fill in each bracket with T for TRUE, F for FALSE.
satan1. In England, judges appointed after 1959 must now retire at 65.好听的英文歌曲推荐（ ）
IV．简答题[wqguo4]：（着重考查学生对法律基本术语、重要法律概念的理解与掌握程度）
一切顺利英文
Example：Answer the following questions according to what you have learned this term.
1. What is the distinction between a wrong and a crime?
V．完形填空题[wqguo5](Cloze Test)：（着重考查学生对法律知识和法律语言的综合运用能力）
Example：
One evening police officers saw a man and woman running down a street. The police 1 them. The woman had a bag of money in her hand and a bulge in 2 locksmithjacket. They pat her down and found a gun. Then they 3 down her companion; they found nothing. They took 4 to the station, booked them and arrested them for armed robbery. Back on patrol 5 that night they saw a group of rowdy college students 6 a football victory. The group was in a quiet neighborhood. The two officers told the youths to “keep quiet.” Still later, they saw a 7 stumble and fell down; they took him to a nearby shelter.cate blanchett
A few days later, a 8 charged the two armed robbery suspects 9 robbery, according to the state’s criminal code. The woman went to 10 ; the jury acquitted her becau the only eyewitness died 11 a heart attack the morning of the trial. After charging her companion, the procutor offered the male suspect a “deal.” In exchange 12_ a plea of guilty, the procutor would reduce the charge to simple theft and ask the judge for a ntence to a newly instituted home confinement program instead of to prison. The man
accepted the deal and pleaded guilty, but the judge 13_ the request for home confinement. She ntenced the man to 14_ for two years. Becau of good behavior and a court order 15_ the overcrowded prison to be in violation of the Constitution, prison officials relead the man after six months, judging that he would not riously endanger the community.
for court celebrating later pat rejected drunk her with prison arched of procutor declaring both
VI．案例分析题[wqguo6]：（着重考查学生对英美法案例的理解程度和分析判断能力）
Example：Read the following ca and answer the questions according to it.
Abbassy v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
[1990] 1 WLR 385 Court of Appeal
(Purchas, Mustill and Woolf LJJ)
vivFacts：
The plaintiff motorist, an Iranian, was stopped by the police and asked four times about the ownership of the vehicle: on each occasion the reply was abusive. On being told that he would be arrested unless he could satisfy the constable as to the ownership of the Mercedes, the plaintiff said that British laws meant nothing to him. The constable then told him that he was being arrested for “unlawful posssion ”and he was held in custody for some two hours before being relead. In an action for, inter alia, wrongful arrest and fal imprisonment the judge ruled that the arrest had been unlawful as the constable’s explanation of the reason for the arrest had been insufficient and the plaintiff was awarded £5,000 by way of damages. The defendants appealed.
Held:
The judge had been wrong to withdraw from the jury the issue as to whether the arrest had been unlawful and the appeal would be allowed to that extent.
Purchas LJ:说
“The powers of arrest without warrant which the (constable) purported to exerci were granted under S.2(4) of the Criminal Law Act 1967, now replaced in equivalent terms by S.24(6) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. That this power should be available to constable is important for the protection of the public for obvious reasons. It is, however, of equal importance to the protection of the lfsame citizens that the statutory powers to which I have just referred should not be abud. It was for this reason that the “rules” summarized in the speech of Viscount Simon in Christie v Leachinsky [1974] AC 573-588 came to be recognized by the courts… It would be superfluous to repeat the further analysis of this historic foundation of the principle that the person arrested must be made aware of the reasons for that arrest contained in Viscount Simon’s speech. The principle remains unqualified in any material respect today. Neither the 1967 Act nor the 1984 Act by any statutory provision made any such qualification.
