ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏã
来源: BlogBus 原始链接: http://www.blogbus.com:80/blogbus/blog/archive.php?id=5201 存档链接: https://web.archive.org/web/20041221152944id_/http://www.blogbus.com:80/blogbus/blog/archive.php?id=5201
ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏã 2004/06/10 µ½ 2004/06/22 Æíµ»
2004-06-19 12:42 ½ñÌìÊÇСÓãÖп¼µÄÈÕ×Ó¡£ ºÜ¾ÃûÓмûµ½Ëý£¬ÏëËý¡£¿É°®µÄ¡¢ÂÊÕæµÄ¡¢¾óÇ¿µÄСÓã¡£¶þÔ·ÒÄáÓãËƺõºÃ¾Ã¶¼Ã»ÓпªÃÅÁË£¬×îºóµÄÒ»¸ö¡°Ð¡ÅÝÅÝ¡±ÊÇstarry night£¬¹í÷ȵÄÃÀ£¬Å·ÅµÄÏòÈÕ¿û¡£ Æíµ»£¬Æíµ»£¬Ó¸ҵÄСÓã»á¿´µ½¸üÃÀºÃµÄδÀ´¡£ Post by ˼ÔÆÁ÷ÄÏ @ 12:42 ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏ㣨Èý£©
2004-06-18 02:51 ×Ô´ÓÓÐÁË ÄûÃÊ¿§·È ºÍ ÑòÑò Á½¸ö¿ÍÈË£¬ ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏã ±ãÓÐÁ˺ܶàÉúÆø¡£ ÄûÃÊÒ²ÒòΪ¿ªÐÄ£¬»áÔÚÄûÃÊË®Öжà¼ÓһЩ·äÃÛ£¬ÈÃÖË®ÖеÄËáɬ±ä³ÉÁ˵µµÄ»Øζ¡£ ¿ÍÈ˺È϶¼ËµÌð£¬ÄûÃʵ¹ÊÇÓеãÊÖ×ãÎÞ´ëÁË£¬ËýÒÔΪ´¿ÕýµÄÄûÃÊË®µ½µ×»áÓÐЩ΢ËáµÄ¡£ ÄûÃÊÊÔ×ÅÉÙ·Å·äÃÛ£¬¿ÉÄûÃÊË®¾ÓÈ»»¹ÊÇÒ»Èç¼ÈÍùµÄÌð¡£ ËýСÐÄÇÐÏÂһƬÐÂÏÊÄûÃÊƬ£¬ÓÃÉà¼âÅö´¥¡ª¡ªÈ´Ã»ÓмÇÒäÖеÄËáɬ֮¼«£¬½öÓеÄÒ»µãËᣬҲÊDZ»ÃÀÃîÇåÌð°ü¹ü×ŵġ£ ÄûÃÊ´ó³ÔÒ»¾ª£¬Ï¸Ï¸¿´ÊÖÖеÄÄûÃÊ£¬ÄÇÎÆÀíÖеÄËáɬ£¬µ½µ×ÊÇʲôʱºò²»¶¯ÉùÉ«µÄ±ä³ÉÇåÌðµÄÁË£¿£¡ »ØÒäÖУ¬ËƺõÕâЩÌ죬ÄûÃÊÊØ×ŠСµê ʱ×Ü»áÏëµ½ Ñǹþ ¡ª¡ªÄǸöËý°®×ŵÄÄÐ×Ó¡£ ÄѵÀÕâЩµÄÌðÊÇÒòΪËûô£¿ÄÇЩÇгöµÄÄûÃÊƬÒòΪËû¶ø×Ô¶¯±ä³ÉÇåÌð¹ü×Å΢ËáÁËô£¿ ËƺõûÓÐÆäËûµÄÀíÓÉ£¬ÄûÃÊÈÃ×Ô¼ºÏàÐÅÌí¼ÓÁË°®Ç飬ÄûÃÊƬ¾Í»á±äÌ𣺣© ÈÃÈËÐÄÇéÓä¿ìµÄÉÏÎ磬ÄûÃÊÈ¥ÁËÄǼÒÈÃËýÄÑÒÔÍü»³µÄ ¿§·Èµê ¡£ ¿§·ÈµêµÄÖ÷ÈË Ç¾Þ± ¸Õ¸Õ°ÑÁõº£¼ô¶Ì£¬ÄûÃÊÈ̲»×¡Ëµ£º¡°ÎÒϲ»¶¶Ì¶ÌµÄÁõº££¬ÅäÇåÐãµÄüëºÍÑÛ¾¦£¬ÊÇÄÍ¿´µÄÒ»ÖÖÔÏζ¡£¡±ÕâÊÇËýµÚÒ»´ÎÔÚ ¿§·Èµê ºÍ Ǿޱ ˵»°¡£ ËæºóµÄ¼¸Ì죬ÄûÃÊ»¹ÊÇÏ°¹ßÿÌìÈ¥¿§·ÈµêºÈÒ»±¸ÕÖóºÃµÄ¿§·È£¬ÏíÊÜÓÆÏеĴ¼Ïã¡£ ÄÇЩÌìÀËý·¢ÏÖÁËÒ»¸ö½Ð×öFennyµÄ Óã¶ù £¬Í¬ÑùÿÌ춼À´¿§·Èµê£¬Í¬ÑùºÜÏíÊÜ¿§·ÈµÄ´¼Ïã¡£ ²»Í¬µÄÊÇÄǸö»îÆõÄС Óã¶ù ×ÜÊǺܻý¼«µÄÈ¥ºÍ Ǿޱ ÁÄÌ죬Çë½Ì·¨Ó²¢¿ªÐĺÍÈÏÕæµÄˢϴÄÇЩ¾«ÖÂÃÀÀöµÄ¿§·È±£º£© ÄûÃÊÔ¶Ô¶µÄ΢Ц¿´×Å£¬È´ÖÕÓÚ±» Óã¶ù ÌøÀ´ÌøÈ¥µÄÉíÓ°ÎüÒý£¬È̲»×¡Ë³×Å Óã¶ù µÄ½Å²½À´µ½ËýµÄСµê¡ª¡ª ¶þÔ·ÒÄáÓã ¡£ ¶þÔ·ÒÄáÓã ÀïÃæÓкܶàµÄСÅÝÅÝ£¬ÊÇ Óã¶ù ¼Ç¼Éú»îµÄÔØÌå¡£»ò´ó»òС£¬»ò͸Ã÷»ò²ÊÉ«£¬»ò¿ìÀÖ»òÓdz ×îеÄÄǸöÅÝÅÝÉÏÊ飺¡°²»¹ÜÎһ᲻»áÈ¥Ó¢¹ú£¬ÎÒÒ»¶¨ÒªÈ¥ÉϺ££¡£¡¡±ÄûÃÊЦ£¬ÕæÊÇÒ»¸ö¿É°®µÄС Óã¶ù ¡£ ÄǸöʱºò£¬ÄûÃÊûÓÐÏëµ½Õâ¸öÈç´Ë¿É°®µÄС Óã¶ù »á³ÉΪËýÐÄÖкÍСµêÀïÈç´ËÖØÒªµÄÒ»²¿·Ö¡£ ¡ª¡ªÎ´Íê´ýÐø£º£© Post by ˼ÔÆÁ÷ÄÏ @ 02:51 ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏ㣨¶þ£©
2004-06-15 18:34 ÄûÃʲ»ÖªËù´ëµÄÕ¾ÔÚ¿Õµ´µ´µÄ Сµê ÖÐÑ룬Ã÷ÏÔÊÇÐèҪװÐ޵ģ¬¿ÉÓÖ²»Ïë½èÓÃÏֳɵÄÑù°å·¿¡£ ÄûÃÊÖ»ºÃ¿ªÊ¼×Ô¼ºÑо¿¸´ÔÓµÄÉè¼Æͼֽ£¬´ÓÍøÂçÊéµêÀï°áÀ´Ò»¶Ñµç×ӽ̲ģ¬¿´Á˸ö´ó¸Å¡£È»ºóÃþË÷¡¢ÊµÑ顢ʧ°Ü¡¢¸Ä½ø¡¡ ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏã ÔÚËýµÄÒâ־ָʹÏ£¬±»À´»Ø·ÛË¢Á˶à´Î£¬Á¬Ç½±ÚÉϵÄССװÊÎͼ»£¬Ò²ÊǶ¤ÁËÓÖж£¬Ð¶ÁËÓÖ×°¡¡Ëƺõ¹ýÁËÒ»¸öÊÀ¼Í£¬Áà×ÅÓÍÆáÍ°µÄÄûÃÊÍÇÈ»µÄ×øÔÚ Ð¡µê µÄµØ°åÉÏ£¬à«à«£ºÄǾÍÏÈÕâÑù°É¡£ ×î³õµÄÈÕ×Ó£¬ÄûÃÊÒ»¸öÈËÊØ׿ÅįµÄ Сµê ¡£ ËýÒ»ÈÕÈÕ½«ÐÂÏʵÄÄûÃÊƬ¾«ÐĵĴÓÇé¸ÐÖÐÇÐÀ룬·ÅÈë¼ÓÁËÐÂÏÊ·äÃ۵İ×Ë®ÖУ¬µÈ´ýÁ½Õß»ºÂýÎÂÈáµÄÈÜΪһÌ壬ȻºóÉ¢·¢³öÇåеķҷ¼ºÍκ͵Ä΢Ëá¡£ Ëý½«ÕâÑùµÄÄûÃÊˮСÐĶ˳ö£¬È»¶øÈÔȻûÓпÍÈËפ×ã¡£ÄûÃÊÆäʵҲ²»ÊǺÜÔÚºõ£¬ËýÔÚÓÃÐĵĽ«ÎÆÀíÖеÄËáɬ£¬½þÈó³ÉÔ±¾µÄ·¼Ï㣬Õâ¶ÔËýµÄÐÄÀ´Ëµ£¬ÒѾ×ã¹»¡£ Ö»ÊÇÔÚÂú×ãµÄͬʱ£¬ÄûÃÊ»áÓÐһЩÂäį¡£ ÂäįµÄ±³ºóÊÇÆÚ´ý£¬ËýÆÚ´ý»òÐí»áÓÐÒ»Ì죬ÓзÈË×ß½ø ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏã £¬ÓÃÐĵÄÆ·³¢Ò»±ÐÂÏÊÄûÃÊË®£¬ºÍËýÒ»Æð·ÖÏí·¼ÏãµÄ¸ÊÙý΢Ëá¡£ Ò»ÈÕƽ·²µÄ°øÍí£¬ÄûÃʳÁ½þÔÚ¡° ÅÝÅÝÌà ¡±µÄÓÎÏ·Àï¡£ ͻȻ£¬ÒѾ»ýÔÜÁËÉÙÐí»Ò³¾µÄµêÃű»Ã͵ÄÍÆ¿ª£¬Ò»¸öÅ®×ÓÐÀϲµÄ¿´×ÅÄûÃÊ£º¡°ÎÒºÜϲ»¶ÍæÅÝÅÝÌÃÁË£¡ÎÒÒ²ºÃ°®ºÃ°®ÄûÃÊ°¡£¡¡± ÄûÃÊЦÁË£¬ºóÀ´£¬ËýÖªµÀÔÀ´Ëý½Ð ÄûÃÊ¿§·È £¬Ò»¸ö¿ÊÍûÑ°ÕÒÀ¶É«ÄûÃÊÊ÷µÄÅ®×Ó£¬ËýÒ²ÓÐÒ»¼ÒСµê£¬ÊÕ´æ×Å ÒÅʧµÄÃÀºÃ ¡£ ÃÅÓÖ±»ÍÆ¿ªÁË£¬¡° ÎÒ½ÐÑòÑò £¡^_^£¡½ã½ã£¬ÎÒºÃϲ»¶ÕâÀï°¡£¡¡±¡ª¡ªÒ»¸öÇáÁéµÄÅ®º¢×ßÁ˽øÀ´¡£ ÄûÃÊ¿ªÐĵÄÓ¹ýÈ¥£¬¿ÉËýÔÚÁôÏÂÁËÒ»¸öÌðÃÀЦÈݺ󣬾ÍתÉíÀëÈ¥ÁË¡£ ÒÔºóµÄÈÕ×Ó£¬ ÑòÑò ÿÌ춼»áÀ´ÕâÀïºÈÒ»±ÐÂÏʵÄÄûÃÊË®£¬ÖÕÓÚÓÐÒ»Ì죬ÑòÑòÁôÏÂÁËËýСµêµÄµØÖ·£¬Ð¡µêµÄÃû×ֽРͬµÇ±Ë°¶ ¡£ Ò»¸öÏÂÎ磬ÄûÃÊÀ´µ½ ͬµÇ±Ë°¶ £¬¼ò½àµÄ×°ÐÞ£¬Ã»ÓÐͼ»£¬Ö»ÓйÊÊ£¬È´ÊÇÈç´ËÃÀºÃ¡£ ÄûÃÊ¿´ÁËÕûÕûÒ»¸öÏÂÎ磬ÄÇЩɢÂþµÄÎÄ×Ö¡¢Å¨³íµÄ¸ÐÇéºÍµµµÄÓÇÉËÉîÉîÕðº³×ÅËýµÄÐÄÁé¡£ ´ÓÄÇÒÔºó£¬ÄûÃÊÿÌ춼»áÈ¥ÄǸöµØ·½£¬È¥¿´ÄÇЩ»ò¿ªÐÄ»òÉ˸еĹÊÊ£¬²¢ÌÛ°®×ÅÄǸö½Ð×ÅËý½ã½ãµÄÅ®º¢£¬ ÑòÑò ¡£ ¡ª¡ªÎ´Íê´ýÐø£º£© Post by ˼ÔÆÁ÷ÄÏ @ 18:34 ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏ㣨һ£©
2004-06-14 16:30 ÄûÃÊÊǵ»ÆµÄССÍÖÔ²£¬Á½¶ËÏñ΢ЦµÄ×ì½ÇÒ»ÑùÇÌÆð£¬Óзҷ¼µÄÆø棬ÑÚ¸ÇÃô¸ÐµÄ¼«ËáºÍ΢¿à¡£ ÄûÃÊŬÁ¦ÔÚÒ»¸öÃÀÀöµÄ³ÇÊкúÃÉú»î×Å£¬ÄÇÀïÓÐÃÀÀö²¤ÂÜ¡¢ÈÈÇéºì뵤ºÍÌðÃÀâ¹ûµÄÅã°é¡£ »¹Óб»ÄûÃÊϲ°®×ŵĻ½×ö Ñǹþ µÄÄÐ×Ó¡£ ÄûÃÊ°®Î¢Ð¦£¬ÈçͬËýµÄÍâ±í£¬Ã÷ÀÊ¿ìÀÖ¡£ ËýÀÖÓÚ¸ÐȾÉí±ßµÄÆø·Õ£¬ÈÿìÀÖµÄζµÀÉ¢Âþ¿ªÀ´£¬ÕâÑùµÄÄûÃÊÒ²±»ºÜ¶àÈËϲ°®×Å£¬Ëû£¨Ëý£©ÃÇ˵ËýÕæÊÇÒ»¸ö¿É°®µÄÄûÃÊ¡£ ÄûÃÊ°²¾²ÎÂ˳µÄÉú»îÔÚÕâÑùµÄ»·¾³ÀÂú×ãµÄ΢Ц×Å£¬Ö»ÊÇż¶û»áÔÚÒ»¸ö²»¾ÒâµÄÉîÒ¹¸Ð¾õµ½ÄÚÀïË¿Ë¿Èë¿ÛµÄËáɬ¡£ ÄÇÑùµÄËáɬÐèÒªÒ»±¼ÓÁËÐÂÏÊ·äÃ۵İ׿ªË®»ºÂý½þÈóÏ¡ÊÍ£¬Ö±ÖÁκ͵ÃÈÚΪһÌ壬²ÅÄÜÉ¢·¢³öÌØÊâµÄÇåкͷ¼Ïã¡£ È»¶øûÓжàÉÙÈËÕâÑùµÄÄÍÐÄ£¬ËûÃÇ×ÜÊÇÆȲ»¼°´ýµÄÄóö½Á°è°ô°ÑÖˮӲÉúÉúµÄ¼·³öÀ´£¬ÈÔÊÇËáɬµÄÖË®£¬ÈÔÊÇÇåÌðµÄ·äÃÛ¡£ ËûÃÇ°ÑÕâÖÖǣǿµÄ»ìºÏÎïһͬºÈÏ£¬ÈÌ×ű»ÈÔÈ»¼âÈñËáɬ´ÌÍ´µÄζ¾õ£¬Ëµ¡°ºÃ¡±¡£ ÄûÃÊÓÐЩʧÍû£¬¾õµÃ²»±»Á˽⡣ Ò»¸öÏÂÎ磬Ëý»Îµ´ÔÚÒ»¸öÃûΪÍøÂçµÄ³ÇÊÐÀµøµøײײµÄ×ß½øÒ»Ìõ СÏï ¡£ ºÜ¶àµÄСµêÃÔÂÒÁËËýµÄÑÛ¾¦£¬Ëý¾ªÌ¾×Å£¬Ò»¼ÒÒ»¼ÒÁ÷Á¬¹ýÈ¥£¬È»ºó¿´µ½Ò»¼ÒÔÏζÍñתµÄ¿§·Èµê£¬ÔÚµØÏÂÌúÀïÓÆÈ»¾²Á¢¡£ ËýÇÓÇÓµÄÍÆ¿ªºñºñµÄľÃÅ£¬¿§·ÈµÄ´¼ÏãºÍµÑŵÄÒôÀÖÆËÃæ¶øÀ´£¬ÄûÃʵÚÒ»´Î¿´µ½ÁËÄǸö½Ð×ö Ǿޱ µÄÅ®×Ó£¬ÓÐÁ鶯µÄÃÀÀö£¬ÓÐÇåÁÁµÄÑÛÉñ¡£ ÄÇÒ»ÑÛ£¬ÈÃÄûÃÊϲ»¶ÉÏÁËÕâ¼Ò¿§·ÈµêºÍ¿§·ÈµêÀï½Ð Ǿޱ µÄÅ®×Ó£¬ÄûÃʾ²¾²µÄÔÚ¿¿´°µÄλÖÃ×øÏ£¬ºÈÏÂÒ»±¸Õ¸ÕÖóºÃµÄ¿§·È¡£ ÔÚ»ØÈ¥µÄ·ÉÏ£¬ÄûÃʵ½ Ïï¿Ú µÄ°ìÊ´¦×âÁËÒ»¼äССµÄµê£¬È¡Ãû ÇåÐÂÄûÃÊÏã £¬ÄûÃÊ¿ÊÍûÔÚÕâÀïÄܽ«ÎÆÀíÀïµÄËáɬ½þÅÝΪ¸ÊÙýµÄ·¼Ïã¡£ ¡ª¡ªÎ´Íê´ýÐø£º£© Post by ˼ÔÆÁ÷ÄÏ @ 16:30 3000×ֵķÒ뼸ºõÒªÎÒµÄÃü......
2004-06-10 21:10 ÔÎÄ£º 1 ¡¢ Offer As we see in every legal system , an agreement requires a meeting of minds-a ¡®consensus¡¯ . The basic elements of that consensus are an offer by one party and an acceptance of the terms of the offer by the other party , English law does not require offer or acceptance to be expressly stated or described as such , and so either or both may be implied from the conduct of the parties .There may sometimes be considerable difficulty in saying who offered or who accepted , or exactly when or even whether acceptance took place . Commercial dealings are not always conducted on a precise and legalistic basis . It may be necessary , for example , to rely on a course of dealings between the parties to prove the existence of a contract between them : Trentham v. Archital Luxfer , 1993. Proving that a binding contract has been made in the course of social or domestic relationships may be still more difficult , as illustrated in Simpkins v. Pays , 1955;para.1.5. Sometimes consensus is more apparent than real , as where the parties do not have equal bargaining power , but if they seem to be agreed that will usually suffice for legal purposes . Assuming that the parties intend legal consequences and express their intentions sufficiently clearly by their words or conduct, and that their agreement is not vitiated by fundamental mistake or fraud or other such difficulties, or by absence of writing in the few situations where English law requires writing, acceptance of an offer ,and how and when is it accepted? These are the questions we now examine. An offer must be sufficiently precise to be capable of acceptance. A distinction must therefore be drawn between offers and¡¯inviations to treat¡¯.An invitation to treat is only an expression of a general willingness to bargain and as such of no legal effect . We have seen that most advertisements are in that category-intended only to arouse the customer¡¯s interest so that he or she will make an offer ,which the seller can then accept or refuse as he thinks fit . In English legal theory the same is true of statements of price per se , whether or not attached to the goods in question , and even if given in response to a specific inquiry : Harvey v. Facey , 1893; Scancarriers v. Aotearoa , 1985. Even when the buyer selects goods for himself or herself in a self-service store , the theory is that the buyer must still make an offer for them at the checkout point , where the offer could still be refused : Pharma-ceutical Society v. Boots , 1953. But circumstances alter cases , as usual . We have seen in Carlill , Warlow and Lefkowitz , situations where the advertisers were held to have made statements which amounted to offers because they propose or required particular responses from their readers . Depeding on the terms on which quotations or tenders are invited , the prices stated in them could binding offers : Butler v.Ex-Cell-O , 1979 ; Northern Construction v. Gloge , 1986(Canada) . Again , a customer who puts petrol in his car at a self-service petrol station must be the one who accepts the offer to sell at the advertised price , because the situation is such that the proprietor cannot then change his mind and refuse to sell at that price . It may sometimes be very difficult to decide which party has offered and which has accepted , and particularly so where contracts are made by conduct . When a person gets on a bus , for example , does he thereby accept the company¡¯s offer to carry him , or does he merely make an offer which the company may then accept by taking his money and giving him a ticket ? Or is the ticket itself the offer ? If the ticket is the basis of the contract , then at least in theory a passenger should have a reasonable opportunity to see and agree to its terms : Baltic Shipping v. Dillon , 1993(Australia) . English law has so far given no definite answer to this question(see wilkie v. L.P.T.B,1947), though in this and many other situations it may be most important to decide when exactly a contract was made and what its terms were . It is clear at least that the parties ¡®use of the words ¡®offer¡¯ or ¡®acceptance¡¯ is not conclusive . So when in Clifton v. Palumbo, 1974, the land owner said he was prepares to ¡®offer¡¯ his estate for 600,000 ,it was held that because of the high price and complexity of the estate , his words amounted only to an invitation to treat . This was the case also in Bigg v. Boyd-Gibbins ,1971, when the owner declared that for a quick sale he would ¡®accept¡¯ 26,000 . That in turn meant that when the buyer replied : ¡®I accept your offer¡¯ , he was himself only making an offer ,which the seller was free to reject . An offer must be communicates to the person purporting to accept it , either directly or by some more public announcement or notice , as in Carlill¡¯s case . To put that another way ,one cannot claim to accept an offer without at the time knowing of its existence . If I return a lost dog and then read of a reward for so doing , I cannot claim the reward . An offer is essentially a proposal which can be freely accepted or rejected . If the ¡®offeree¡¯ is given on choice , there is no valid offer . Thus a builder who leaves a building half-completed cannot charge for the work he has done , nor can a contractor who does more than he is asked to do : Sumpter v. Hedges ,1898; Forman v. Liddesdale ,1900 . (But partly performing a severable contract-one divisible into separate items-entitles the contractor to payment for those parts accepted by the offeree : Section 30 , Sale of Goods Act 1979 ; see also Chapters 5 and 9)For the same reason , when one person spends his own money to help another , without being asked to do so , English law will not usually compel that other to repay . Where , for example , A voluntarily paid B¡¯s insurance premium to stop the policy from lapsing , the judge said : ¡®The general principle is ¡that work and labor done or money expended by one man to preserve or benefit the property of another do not according to English law create any lien(right) upon the property saved or benefited , nor¡create any obligation to repay the expenditure . Liabilities are not to be forced upon people behind their backs , any more than you can confer a benefit upon a man against his will¡¯:Flalcke v. Scottish Insurance , 1886;Owen v. Tate , 1975. This unsympathetic refusal to recompense a person who acts in good faith to help his neighbor-to recognize ,that is , the Civil law principle of negotiorum gestio or ¡®management of affairs¡¯-has been described as¡¯ one of the most marked divergences¡Between the Civil law and the Common law¡¯(Nicholas , Introduction to Roman Law ). But inevitably there are exceptions . Money spent saving lives or property at sea must be repaid .A railway company¡¯s claim for feeding and stabling a horse which was delivered to but not collected from the station was upheld in G..N.Ry.V.Swaffield ,1874, because of the necessity of the situation . Acclaim is perhaps more likely to be upheld if the plaintiff reasonably believes the property is his own . In Greenwood v. Bennett , 1972 , an innocent buyer of a car from a thief spent money improving it . When the true owner reclaimed the car from the buyer he had to compensate him for the improvements ¨Ca principle confirmed by the Torts ( Interference with Goods ) Act 1977. Duration of Offer An offer which is stated to be open for a specified time lapses if it is not accepted within that time. If on time is specified , it lapses within a reasonable time . What is reasonable must depend on the circumstances . An offer made by telegram or telex suggests that an equally prompt acceptance is called for : ¡®Quener-duaine v. Cole , 1883. When a company purported to accept an offer for shares six months after it had been made , the court held that the offer was already closed , and so on contract came into existence : Ramsgate Hotel v.Montefiore , 1866; similarly in Hare v. Nicholl , 1966. But negotiations following an offer for a valuable piece of land might be expected to take months before agreement could be reached : Manchester Diocesan Counsil v. Commercial Investment , 1969. Revocation of Offer An offer can be withdrawn at any time before it is accepted . That is still so even though the offeror has promised to keep it open for a specified period of time which has not yet expired . This latter rule may clearly cause injustice if the offeree has incurred expenditure in reliance on the promise , as in Routledge v. Grant ,1828. The difficulty arises because of English law¡¯s definition of ¡®acceptance of the Uniform Laws on International Sale of Goods Act 1967 is to override the common law rule and hold offers open for the time promised-but the Act dose not apply unless expressly adopted by the parties . If and when the 1980 Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods adopted by Britain , Article 6 would likewise override the common law , unless the contract in question expressly excludes the Convention . Such promises appear binding under Scots Law-Paterson v. highland Ry.,1927-as also under Section 2-205 of the American Uniform Commercial Code and Continental systems . Revocation of an offer ,other than by lapse of time ,is not effective until the offeree learns of the offeror¡¯s intention to revoke . That will usually involve communication between the two , e.g. receipt of a letter from the offeror-Byrne v. Van Tienhoven ,1880-or the offeree may be taken to know that the offeror has changed his mind if he has had reliable information to that effect from a third party ; Dickinson v. Dodds,1876.An offer of personal services is necessarily ended by the offeror¡¯s death , but otherwise his estate may be bound at least until the offeree learns of his death : Bradbury v. Morgan,1862. 2 ¡¢ Acceptance A Case The plaintiffs , in London , made an offer by telex to the agents of the defendant corporation , in Holland. This was accepted by a telex which was received on the plaintiff¡¯s telex machine in London . The relevant issue was whether the contract was made in England. The court held that the contract was made in London. Denning LJ When a contract is made by post it is clear law throughout the common law countries that the acceptance is complete as soon as the letter is put into the pose box , and that is the place where the contract is made . But there is on clear rule about contract made by telephone or by Telex. Communications by those means are virtually instantaneous and stand on a different footing . The problem can only be solved by going in stages . Let me first consider the case where two people make a contract by word of mouth in the presence of one another. Suppose for instance that I shout an offer to a man across a river or a courtyard but I do not hear his reply because it is drowned by aircraft flying overhead. There is on contract at that moment. If he wishes to make a contract , he must wait till the aircraft is gone and then shout bake his acceptance so that I can hear what he says. Not until I have his answer am I bound¡ Now take the case where two people make a contract by telephone. Suppose, for instance, that I make an offer to a man by telephone and, in the middle of his reply, the line goosed ¡®ead¡¯ so that I do not hear his words of acceptance. There is not contract at that moment. The other man may not know the precise moment when the line failed. But he will know that the telephone conversation was abruptly broken off: because people usually say something to signify the end of the conversation. If he wishes to make a contract he must therefore get through again to make sure that I heard. Suppose next, that the line does not go dead, but is nevertheless so indistinct that I do not catch what he says and I ask him to repeat it. He then repeats it and I heat his acceptance. The contract is made, not on the first time when I do not hear, but only on the second when I do hear. If he dose not repeat it there is no contract. The contract is only complete when I have his answer accepting the offer. Lastly, take the Telex, suppose a clerk in a London Office taps out on the teleprinter an offer which is immediately recorded on a teleprinter in a Manchester office, and a clerk at that end taps out an acceptance. If the line goes dead in the middle of the sentence of acceptance, the teleprinter motor will stop. There is then obviously on contract. The clerk at Manchester must get thought again and send his completely sentence. But it may happen that the line does not get through to London. Thus the clerk at Manchester may tap out his acceptance and it will not be recorded in London because the ink at the London end fails or something of that kind. In that case, the Manchester clerk will not know of the failure but the London clerk will know of it and will immediately send back a message-¡®not receiving¡¯. Then, when the fault is rectified, that Manchester clerk will repeat his message. Only then is there a contract. It is not until the message is received that the contract is complete. In all the instances I have taken so far, the man who sends the message of acceptance knows that it has not been received or he has reason to know it. So he must repeat it. But, suppose he did not know that his message did not get home. He thinks it has. This may happen if the listener on the phone does not catch the words of acceptance, but nevertheless does not trouble to ask for them to be repeated: or the ink on the teleprinter fails at the receiving end, but the clerk does not ask for the message to be repeated: so that man who sends an acceptance has been received. The offeror in such circumstances is clearly bound, because he will be estopped from saying that he did not receive the message of acceptance. It is his own fault that he did not get it. But if there should be a case where the offeror without any fault on his part does not receive the message of acceptance-yet the sender of it reasonably believes it has got home when it has not-then I think there is not contract. My conclusion is that the rule about instantaneous communication between the parties is different from the rule about the post. The contract is only complete when the acceptance is received by the offeror, and the contract is made at the place where the acceptance is received. ÒëÎÄ£º 1¡¢ÒªÔ¼ ÕýÈçÎÒÃÇÔÚËùÓз¨ÂÉÖƶÈÖп´µ½µÄÒ»Ñù£¬Ò»·ÝÐÒéÒªÇóË«·½Òâ˼´ï³ÉÒ»Ö¡ª¡ª¡°ºÏÒ⡱¡£ºÏÒâµÄ»ù±¾ÒªËØÔòÊÇÒ»·½µ±ÊÂÈ˵ÄÒªÔ¼ºÍÁíÒ»·½µ±ÊÂÈ˶ÔÒªÔ¼ÖÐÌõ¼þµÄ³Ðŵ¡£Ó¢¹ú·¨Âɲ¢²»ÒªÇó¶ÔÒªÔ¼»ò³Ðŵ×÷³öÃ÷ʾµÄÉùÃ÷»ò¹ÚÒÔÕâÑùµÄÃû³Æ£¬ËùÒÔµ±ÊÂÈËÒ»·½»òË«·½¿Éͨ¹ýÆäÐÐΪĬʾµÄ±í´ï¡£ÓÐʱºò£¬ÎÒÃÇ¿ÉÄÜ»áºÜÄÑ˵³öÊÇË·¢³öÁËÒªÔ¼£¬ÓÖÊÇË×÷³öÁ˳Ðŵ£¬»òÕß׼ȷµÄ˵³öʲôʱºò×÷³öÁ˳Ðŵ»òÕß¾¿¾¹ÊÇ·ñ×÷³öÁ˳Ðŵ¡£ÉÌʽ»Òײ¢·Ç×ÜÊǾ«È·µÄ£¬Ð´³ÉÌõÎĵġ£ÀýÈ磬ΪÁËÖ¤Ã÷Ë«·½µ±ÊÂÈËÖ®¼ä´æÔÚןÏͬ¹Øϵ£¬±ØÐëÊ×ÏÈÁ˽âËûÃǵĽ»Ò×¹ý³Ì£¨ Trentham v. Archital Lyxfer,1993. £©¡£ÕýÈçÔÚ Simpkins Ëß Pays Ò»°¸ÖÐËù²ûÊöµÄÄÇÑù£¨ 1995 £¬ para.1.5 £©£¬Ö¤Ã÷ÔÚÉç»áºÍ¼ÒÍ¥¹ØϵÖÐÓÐЧ³ÉÁ¢µÄºÏͬ¿ÉÄܾ͸üÄÑÁË¡£ºÏÒâÓÐʱ¸üÊDZíÃæµÄ£¬¶ø·ÇÕæʵÒâ˼µÄÒ»Ö£¬Èçµ±ÊÂÈ˼䲻¾ßÓÐƽµÈµÄ̸ÅÐÌõ¼þ£¬µ«ÊÇÈç¹ûËûÃDZíÃæÉÏ´ï³ÉÁËÒ»Ö£¬ÔòÍùÍù¾ßÓз¨ÂÉЧÁ¦¡£¼ÙÉèË«·½µ±ÊÂÈËÒâͼ²úÉúijһ·¨Âɺó¹û£¬²¢ÓÃËûÃǵÄÑÔÐÐÊ®·ÖÇåÎúµØ±í´ïÁËÒâͼ£¬¶øÇÒË«·½ÐÒé²»´æÔÚ¸ù±¾ÐÔ´íÎó¡¢ÆÛÕ©»òµÚ 10Õ¡¢µÚ11ÕÂËùÊöµÄÆäËû´ËÀàÎÊÌ⣬Ҳ²»È±ÉÙÓ¢¹ú·¨ÂÉÒªÇóµÄÊéÃæÐÎʽ¼¸ÖÖÇéÐÎÖеÄÒª¼þ£¨µÚ4Õ£©£¬¼´²»´æÔÚÉÏÊöʹºÏͬÎÞЧµÄÊÂÓÉʱ£¬¶ÔÒªÔ¼µÄ³Ðŵ±ã¹¹³ÉÇ¿ÖÆÐÔºÏͬ¡£µ«ÊǺÎΪҪԼ£¿ÒªÔ¼ÊÇÈçºÎ»òºÎʱ±»³Ðŵ£¿ÕâЩ¶¼ÊÇÎÒÃÇÏÖÔÚËùÒªÑо¿µÄÎÊÌâ¡£ ÒªÔ¼±ØÐë×ã¹»Ã÷È·£¬ÒÔ±ãÓÚ±»³Ðŵ¡£Òò´Ë£¬ÎÒÃDZØÐëÒªÄÜÇø·ÖÒªÔ¼ºÍ¡°ÒªÔ¼ÑûÇ롱µÄ²»Í¬¡£ÒªÔ¼ÑûÇë½ö½öÊÇÔ¸Òâ½øÐн»Ò׵ĸÅÀ¨µÄÒâ˼±íʾ£¬²»¾ßÓз¨ÂÉЧÁ¦¡£ÎÒÃÇÒÑÖªµÀ£¬¾ø´ó¶àÊýµÄ¹ã¸æ¾ÍÊôÓÚ´ËÀ࣬¼´ÒâͼÓÕµ¼ËûÈËÏò×Ô¼º·¢³öÒªÔ¼£¬È»ºóÂô·½¿É°´ÕÕ×Ô¼ºµÄÒâÔ¸½ÓÊÜ»òÕ߾ܾø¸ÃÒªÔ¼¡£ÔÚÓ¢¹ú·¨ÂÉÀíÂÛÉÏ£¬Ã÷Âë±ê¼Û±¾Éí£¬²»¹ÜÊÇ·ñ±êÔÚËùÕùÒéµÄÉÌÆ·ÉÏ£¬ÉõÖÁÊǶÔijÈ˾ßÌåѯÎÊËù±¨µÄ¼Û¸ñ£¬¶¼±»¿´×÷ÊÇÑûÔ¼ÑûÇ루 Harvey v. Facey £¬ 1893 £» Scan-carriers v. Aotearoa £¬ 1985 £©¡£ÉõÖÁµ±Âò·½ÔÚ×ÔÑ¡É̳¡¹ºÂò»õÎÀíÂÛÉÏÈÏΪ£¬Âò·½ÈÔ±ØÐëÔÚÊÕÒø̨·¢³öÒªÔ¼£¬¶ø´ËÒªÔ¼ÈÔ¿ÉÒÔ±»¾Ü¾ø¡££¨ Pharma-ceutical Society v. Boots , 1953. £© µ«Èçͨ³£Ëù¼û£¬¾ßÌåÇé¿öÓ¦µ±¾ßÌå·ÖÎö¡£ÎÒÃÇÒѾÔÚµÚÒ»Õ Carlill , Warlow and Lefkowitz ÕâЩ°¸ÀýÖÐÁ˽⵽£¬ÔÚ¹ã¸æÉ̽¨Òé»òÒªÇó¹Ë¿ÍÃǸøÓèÌض¨»Ø¸´µÄÇé¿öÏ£¬ËûÃǵÄÉùÃ÷¾Í±»ÊÓΪҪԼ¡£±¨¼Ûµ¥ºÍͶ±êÊéÖеļ۸ñÌõ¼þÒ²¿ÉÒÔ¹¹³ÉÓÐÔ¼ÊøÁ¦µÄÒªÔ¼£¬µ«ÒªÊÓÆäÖеÄÌõ¼þµÄ¾ßÌåÇé¿ö¶ø¶¨ (Butler v.Ex-Cell-O , 1979 ; Northern Construction v. Gloge , 1986 £¬ Canada) ¡£ÔÙ±ÈÈ磬һÃû¹Ë¿ÍÔÚ×ÔÖú¼ÓÓÍÕ¾¼ÓÁËÓÍ£¬±ØÐë°´¹ã¸æ¼Û¸ñ½ÓÊÜÒªÔ¼£¬ÒòΪÕâÖÖÇé¿öÏ£¬¾ÓªÕßÎÞ·¨¸Ä±ä×¢Òâ»ò¾Ü¾øÒԸü۸ñ³öÊÛ¡£ ÓÐʱºò£¬ÎÒÃǺÜÄÑÇø·ÖËÊÇÒªÔ¼·½£¬ËÊdzÐŵ·½£¬ÌرðÊÇÒòÐÐΪ¶ø¶©Á¢ºÏͬʱ¸üÊÇÈç´Ë¡£±ÈÈ磬ijÈËÉÏÁ˹«½»³µ£¬ÊÇ·ñÒò´ËËû¾Í½ÓÊÜÁ˹«Ë¾³ÐÔØËûµÄÒªÔ¼£¬»òÊÇ´ËÈ˽ö½ö·¢³öÁËÒ»¸öÒªÔ¼£¬¶ø¹«Ë¾Ôòͨ¹ýÊտƱµÄ·½Ê½×÷³ö³ÐŵÁË£¿»òÕß³µÆ±±¾Éí¾ÍÊÇÒªÔ¼£¿Èç¹û³µÆ±ÊǺÏͬµÄÒÀ¾Ý£¬ÄÇôÖÁÉÙ´ÓÀíÂÛÉϽ²£¬³Ë¿ÍÓ¦¸ÃÓÐÒ»¸öºÏÀíµÄ»ú»áÀ´¿´¿´³µÆ±²¢¶ÔÆäÌõ¿î±íʾͬÒâ¡£Æù½ñΪֹ£¬Ó¢¹ú·¨ÂɶÔÕâÒ»ÎÊÌ⻹ûÓÐ×÷³öÃ÷È·µÄ»Ø´ð£¬¾¡¹ÜÔÚÕâÖÖÇé¿öÏÂÒÔ¼°ÆäËûºÜ¶àÇé¿öÏ£¬È·¶¨ºÏͬ¶©Á¢µÄ¾ßÌåʱ¼äºÍÆäÖеÄÌõ¿î¿ÉÄÜÊÇ×îΪÖØÒªµÄ¡£ÖÁÉÙÓÐÒ»µãºÜÇå³þ£¬¼´µ±ÊÂÈËʹÓá°ÒªÔ¼¡±»ò¡°³Ðŵ¡±µÄ´ë´Ç²»ÊǾö¶¨ÐԵġ£µ±ÊÂÈ˶ÔÒªÔ¼ºÍ³ÐŵµÄʹÓò»¾ßÓоö¶¨ÐÔ¡£ËùÒÔ£¬ÔÚ 1974 Äê Clifton Ëß Palumbo °¸ÖУ¬Ò»ÍÁµØËùÓÐÕß˵Ëû´òËãÓà 600 £¬ 000 Ó¢°÷³öÊÛËûµÄ²»¶¯²ú£¬¿ÉÊÇÓÉÓÚ¼Û¸ñ¸ß°ººÍ¸Ã²»¶¯²úµÄ¸´ÔÓÐÔ£¬·¨ÔºÈÏΪËûµÄ»°Ö»ÄÜÊÓΪ¡°ÒªÔ¼ÑûÇ롱¡£ 1971 Äê Bigg Ëß Boyd-Gibbins °¸Ò²ÊÇÕâÖÖÇéÐΣ¬ËùÓÐÕßÉù³Æ£ºÎªÁËÄܾ¡¿ì³öÊÛ£¬Ëû½«½ÓÊÜ 26 £¬ 000 Ó¢°÷µÄ¼Û¸ñ¡£ÕâÒâζ×ŵ±Âò·½»Ø¸´£º¡°ÎÒ½ÓÊÜÄãµÄ¿ª¼Û¡±Ê±£¬ÊÇÂòÖ÷×Ô¼º·¢³öµÄÒ»¸öÒªÔ¼£¬¶øÂô·½ÓÐȨÀû¾Ü¾øÕâÒ»ÒªÔ¼¡£ ÒªÔ¼±ØÐë´«´ï¸øÒâͼ½ÓÊÜÒªÔ¼µÄÈË£¬¼È¿ÉÒÔͨ¹ýÖ±½ÓµÄ·½Ê½£¬Ò²¿Éͨ¹ýÆäËû¸ü¾ßÓй«¿ªÐԵĹ«¸æ»ò֪ͨµÄ·½Ê½£¬¾ÍÏñ Carlill °¸Ò»Ñù¡£ÔÙÕߣ¬ÔÚ²»ÖªµÀÓÐÒªÔ¼´æÔÚµÄÇé¿öÏ£¬ÈËÃÇÒ²²»¿ÉÄÜ×÷³ö³Ðŵ¡£Èç¹ûÔÚ·µ»¹¶ªÊ§µÄ¹·Ö®ºó²Å»ñÖªÐüÉÍ֮ʣ¬Ôò²»ÄÜÒªÇóÉͽ𡣠´Ó±¾ÖÊÉÏ˵£¬ÒªÔ¼ÊÇÒ»ÖÖ¿ÉÒÔËæÒâ½ÓÊÜ»ò¾Ü¾øµÄÌáÒé¡£Èç¹û±»ÒªÔ¼ÈËûÓÐÑ¡ÔñµÄȨÀû£¬Ôò¸ÃÒªÔ¼ÎÞЧ¡£Òò´Ë£¬Èç¹ûij½¨ÖþÕßÖ»Íê³ÉÁ˽¨ÖþµÄÒ»°ë¾Í²»¸ÉÁË£¬ÄÇôËû¶ÔÒѾÍê³ÉµÄ¹¤×÷²»ÏíÓÐÇëÇóȨ£¬Í¬ÑùÒ²²»ÄÜΪËûËù¶à×öµÄ£¬³¬¹ýÁ˺ÏͬËùÒªÇóµÄ¹¤×÷Á¿Ìá³öÇëÇó¡£µ«ÊǶÔÓÚ²¿·ÖµØÂÄÐÐÁË¡°¿É·ÖºÏͬ¡±¡ª¡ª¿ÉÒԷֳɲ»Í¬²¿·ÖµÄºÏͬ£¬¶©Ô¼È˾ÍÓÐȨÀû¶ÔÊÜÒªÔ¼È˳ÐŵµÄ²¿·ÖÇëÇóÖ§¸¶±¨³ê£¨¡¶ÉÌÆ·ÂòÂô·¨¡·£¨ 1979 £©µÚ 30 Ìõ£¬Ò²¿É²Î¼û¸ÃÊéµÚ 5 ¡¢ 9 Õ£©¡£»ùÓÚͬÑùµÄÀíÓÉ£¬µ±Ä³ÈËδ¾¶Ô·½ÇëÇó¶ø×ÔÔ¸»¨Ç®°ïÖúËûÈË£¬Ó¢¹ú·¨ÂɶԴËÍùÍù²»Ç¿ÆȶԷ½²¹³¥¡£ÀýÈ磺ΪÁË·ÀÖ¹±£µ¥ÒÅʧ£¬ A ×ÔԸΪ B ¸¶±£·Ñ£¬·¨¹Ù˵£º¡°Í¨³£µÄÔÔòÊÇ¡¡Ò»·½Îª±£È«ËûÈ˲Ʋú»òʹËûÈ˲ƲúÊÜÒæ¶ø¸¶³öµÄ¹¤×÷¡¢ÀͶ¯¼°½ðÇ®£¬¸ù¾ÝÓ¢¹ú·¨ÂÉ£¬¸Ã·½²»ÄÜÔÚ±»±£È«»òÊÜÒæµÄ²Æ²úÉÏÏíÓÐÁôÖÃȨ¡¡Ò²²»²úÉúÈκγ¥»¹µÄÒåÎñ¡£²»ÂÄÐÐijÈ˸ø×Ô¼ºÇ¿¼ÓµÄÔðÈΣ¬ºÍ²»Î¥±³×Ô¼ºµÄÒâÔ¸¸øÓèijÈ˺ô¦ÊÇÒ»¸öµÀÀí£¨ Flalcke v. Scottish Insurance , 1886;Owen v. Tate , 1975 £©¡£ ÉÆÒâ°ïÖú¡°ÁÚÈË¡±ËùÖµķÑÓ㬱»ÎÞÇéµÄ¾Ü¾ø³¥»¹¡£Õâ¾ÍÊÇ˵¾Ü¾ø³ÐÈÏ´ó½·¨Öеġ°ÎÞÒò¹ÜÀí¡±»ò¡°¹ÜÀíËûÈËÊÂÎñ¡±ÔÔò¡ª¡ªÕâ¸öÔÔò±»ÈÏΪÊÇ´ó½·¨ºÍÆÕͨ·¨ÖС°×îÏÔÖøµÄ·ÖÆçÖ®Ò»¡±£¨Äá¹ÅÀ˹£¬¡¶ÂÞÂí·¨½éÉÜ¡·£©¡£µ±È»Ò²ÓÐÒâÍ⣬º£ÉϾÈÖúÖеĻ¨·Ñ±ØÐë±»³¥»¹£¨ The Winson £¬ 1981 £©¡£ÔÚ 1874 Äê G..N.Ry Ëß Swaffield °¸ÖУ¬Ò»Æ¥Âí±»Ô˵½Ä³»ð³µÕ¾£¬µ«ÎÞÈËÈÏÁ죬Ìú·¹«Ë¾ÇëÇóÅ⳥ιÑøºÍÕչܸÃÂíµÄ·ÑÓã¬ÓÉÓÚÇéÊÆËùÐ裬·¨ÔºÖ§³ÖÁËÕâÒ»ÇëÇó¡£Èç¹ûÔ¸æÓÐÀíÓÉÈÃÈËÏàÐŲƲú¹éÆäËùÓУ¬ÇëÇó¿ÉÄܸüÈÝÒ×»ñµÃ·¨ÔºµÄÖ§³Ö¡£ÔÚ 1972 Äê Greenwood Ëß Bennett °¸ÖУ¬Ò»ÉÆÒâÂòÖ÷´ÓС͵ÄÇÀïÂòÀ´Ò»Á¾Ð¡Æû³µ£¬²¢»¨Ç®¶Ô³µ½øÐÐÁ˸ÄÁ¼¡£µ±³µµÄÕæÕýÖ÷ÈËÏòÂòÖ÷ÒªÇó·µ»¹³µÊ±£¬Ó¦µ±²¹³¥ÂòÖ÷Òò¸ÄÁ¼´Ë³µ¶ø²úÉúµÄ»¨Ïú¡ª¡ªÕâÊÇÒѾÓÉ 1977 Ä꡶ÇÖȨ£¨»õÎï·Áº¦£©·¨°¸¡·ËùÈ·ÈϵÄÔÔò¡£ ÒªÔ¼µÄÆÚÏÞ ÒªÔ¼¹æ¶¨ÓоßÌåÆÚÏ޵ģ¬Èç¹ûδÔÚ¸ÃÆÚÏÞÄÚ±»³ÐŵÔòҪԼʧЧ¡£Èç¹ûδ¹æ¶¨¾ßÌåÆÚÏÞ£¬ÔòÔÙºÏÀíʱ¼äÄÚʧЧ¡£ºÎΪºÏÀí£¬Ó¦ÊÓÇé¿ö¶ø¶¨¡£Èç¹ûÊÇͨ¹ýµç±¨¡¢µç´«·¢³öµÄÒªÔ¼£¬³ÐŵӦµ±Í¬ÑùѸËÙ¡£Ò»Ïî³öÊÛ¹ÉƱµÄÒªÔ¼·¢³öÁù¸öÔºó£¬Ä³¹«Ë¾Òâͼ½ÓÊܸÃÒªÔ¼£¬µ«·¨ÔºÈÏΪ¸ÃÒªÔ¼ÒѾʧЧ£¬Òò´ËºÏͬ²»³ÉÁ¢£¨ Ramsgate Hotel v.Montefiore , 1866 £© 1966 Äê Hare v. Nicholl °¸Ò²ÓÐÀàËÆÇé¿ö¡£µ«ÊǶÔÓÚÒ»¿é¼ÛÖµ²»·ÆµÄÍÁµØ£¬ÒªÔ¼×÷³öºó£¬¿ÉÄÜÒªÐÉÌÊýÔ²ÅÄÜ´ï³ÉÐÒé¡£ ÒªÔ¼µÄ³·Ïû ÔÚÒªÔ¼±»³Ðŵ֮ǰ£¬ÒªÔ¼ÈË¿ÉÒÔËæʱ³·»ØÒªÔ¼¡£¼´±ãÊÇÒªÔ¼ÈËÔÊŵÁËÒ»¸ö¾ßÌåµÄÓÐЧÆÚÏÞ£¬ÔÚÆÚÏÞ½ìÂúÇ°Òà¿É³·»Ø¡£Èç¹ûÊÜÒªÔ¼ÈË»ùÓÚÕâÒ»ÔÊŵ¶ø·¢ÉúÁË·ÑÓ㬺óÒ»¹æÔò¾ÍÏÔÈ»²»¹«Æ½ÁË¡£ÕâÒ»ÄÑÌâÔ´ÓÚÓ¢¹ú·¨ÂɶÔÓÚ³ÐŵµÄ¶¨Ò壬¶Ô´ËÎÒÃǽ«ÔÚÏÂÃæ̽ÌÖ¡£ 1967 Ä꡶¹ú¼Ê»õÎïÂòÂô¹«Ô¼¡·µÄЧÁ¦ÓÅÓÚÆÕͨ·¨£¬Ç°Õ߹涨£¬ÒªÔ¼ÔÚÒªÔ¼ÈËÔÊŵµÄÓÐЧÆÚ¼äÒ»Ö±ÓÐЧ¡ª¡ªµ«ÊÇÖ»Óоµ±ÊÂÈËÃ÷ʾ²ÉÓ㬸÷¨°¸²Å¿ÉÊÊÓá£Ò»µ©Ó¢¹úͨ¹ýÁË 1980 Ä꡶¹ú¼Ê»õÎïÏúÊÛºÏͬάҲÄɹ«Ô¼¡·£¬µÚ 6 ÌõµÄЧÁ¦Ò²Í¬ÑùÓÅÏÈÓÚÆÕͨ·¨¡£³ý·Ç·¢ÉúÕùÒéµÄºÏͬÃ÷È·Ô¼¶¨ÅųýÊÊÓøù«Ô¼¡£ËÕ¸ñÀ¼·¨ÂÉÈÏΪÕâÀàÔ¼¶¨¾ßÓÐÔ¼ÊøÁ¦£¨ Paterson v. highland Ry,1927 £©£¬¡¶ÃÀ¹úͳһÉÌ·¨µä¡·µÚ 2-205 ÌõÒÔ¼°´ó½·¨ÖƶÈÖÐÒ²ÓÐͬÑù¹æ¶¨¡£ Ö»Óе±ÊÜÒªÔ¼ÈËÖªµÀÁËÒªÔ¼ÈËÓг·ÏûÒªÔ¼µÄÒâ˼£¬³·Ïû²ÅÓÐЧ£¬ÕⲻͬÓÚÒªÔ¼ÒòÆÚÏÞ½ìÂúʧЧ¡£ÕâÍùÍùÒªÇóµ±ÊÂÈËÖ®¼äÓÐËùÁªÂ磬ÀýÈ磺ÊÕµ½ÒªÔ¼È˵ÄÀ´ÐÅ£¬»òÕßÊÜÒªÔ¼ÈËÒÑ´ÓµÚÈýÈË´¦»ñµÃ¿É¿¿ÏûÏ¢£¬µÃÖªÒªÔ¼ÈËÒѾ¸Ä±äÖ÷Òâ¡£ÓйØÌṩÀÍÎñµÄÒªÔ¼ÒòÒªÔ¼È˵ÄËÀÍö¶øÖÕÖ¹£¬µ«ÁíÒ»·½Ã棬ÖÁÉÙÔÚÊÜÒªÔ¼ÈË֪ϤÆäËÀÍö֮ǰ£¬ÕâÖÖ״̬ÈÔÊÜÏÞÖÆ£¨ Bradbury v. Morgan,1862 £©¡£ 2¡¢³Ðŵ °¸Àý Ô¸æÔÚÂ׶ØÒԵ紫·½Ê½ÏòλÓÚºÉÀ¼µÄ±»¸æ¹«Ë¾µÄ´úÀíÈË·¢³öÒ»·ÝÒªÔ¼¡£¶Ô·½ÒԵ紫×÷³ö³Ðŵ£¬¸Ã³ÐŵÓÉÔ¸æÔÚÂ׶صĵ紫»ú½ÓÊÜ¡£Ïà¹ØÎÊÌâÊÇ£ººÏͬÊÇ·ñÔÚÓ¢¹úÇ©¶©£¿·¨ÔºÈÏΪºÏͬÊÇÔÚÂ׶ØÇ©¶©µÄ¡£ ÉÏËß·¨Ôºµ¤Äþ·¨¹Ù£º ÔÚºÏͬͨ¹ýÓʼÄÇ©¶©µÄÇé¿öÏ£¬ÆÕͨ·¨¹ú¼Ò¶¼Ã÷È·ÈÏΪ£¬Ò»µ©³ÐŵÐżþͶÈëÓÊÏ䣬¸Ã³Ðŵ¼´ÒѾÍê³É£¬¸ÃµØ¼´ÊǵÞÔ¼µØ¡£µ«¶Ôͨ¹ýµç»°»òµç´«Ç©¶©µÄºÏͬ£¬ÔòÎÞÃ÷È·¹æ¶¨¡£ÕâÀàͨѶ¼¸ºõÊǼ´Ê±µÄ£¬Òò¶øÓÐ×Ų»Í¬µÄÇéÐΡ£ ÎÊÌâÖ»ÄÜÒ»²½Ò»²½À´½â¾ö¡£ÎÒÊ×ÏÈ¿¼ÂÇÁ½¸öÈ˵±Ãæͨ¹ý¿ÚÍ·³ÉÁ¢ºÏͬµÄÇéÐΡ£¼ÙÉèÎÒÏòºÓ¶Ô°¶»òÔº×Ó¶ÔÃæµÄijÈ˺°³öÎÒµÄÒªÔ¼£¬µ«ÊÇÒòΪͷ¶¥Óмܷɻú·É¹ý£¬·É»úµÄÉùÒôÑÚ¸ÇÁËËûµÄ´ð¸´£¬ËùÒÔÎÒÌý²»µ½ËûµÄ´ð¸´¡£Èç¹ûËûÏ£ÍûÇ©¶©ºÏͬ£¬Ëû±ØÐëµÈ·É»ú·ÉÔ¶ºóÔÙº°»ØËûµÄ³Ðŵ£¬ÒÔʹÎÒÄÜÌýµ½ËûÔÚ˵ʲô£¬Ö»ÓÐÎÒÌýµ½ÁËËûµÄ»Ø´ð£¬ÎÒ²ÅÊܺÏͬµÄÔ¼Êø¡£ ÏÖÔÚÔÙ¿´¿´Á½¸öÈËͨ¹ýµç»°´ï³ÉºÏͬµÄÇéÐΡ£±ÈÈ磬¼ÙÉèÎÒͨ¹ýµç»°ÏòijÈË·¢³öÒªÔ¼£¬ÔÚËû´ð¸´µÄ¹ý³ÌÖУ¬Ïß·¶ÏÁË£¬Òò´ËÎÒûÓÐÌýµ½Ëû³ÐŵµÄ»°¡£´ËʱºÏͬ²»³ÉÁ¢¡£¶Ô·½¿ÉÄÜÎÞ·¨È·Öª¶ÏÏßµÄ׼ȷʱ¼ä£¬µ«ÊÇËû»áÖªµÀ½»Ì¸Í»È»ÖжÏÁË¡ª¡ªÒòΪÈËÃÇͨ³£»á˵ЩÌض¨µÄ»°À´±íʾҪ¹Òµç»°ÁË¡£Èç¹ûËûÏ£ÍûÇ©¶©ºÏͬ£¬Ëû±ØÐëΪ´ËÖØв¦Í¨µç»°ÒÔÈ·±£ÎÒÌýµ½ËûµÄ³Ðŵ¡£ÔÙ¼ÙÉèÈç¹ûûÓжÏÏߣ¬µ«Êǵ绰²»ÇåÎúʹµÃÎÒÎÞ·¨ÌýÇåËûÔÚ˵ʲô£¬ÎÒÒªÇóËûÖظ´¡£È»ºóËûÖظ´ÁË£¬ÎÒÒ²Ìýµ½ÁËËûµÄ³Ðŵ¡£ÓÚÊÇ£¬ºÏͬҲ³ÉÁ¢ÁË£¬µ«ºÏͬ²»ÊÇÔÚµÚÒ»´ÎÎÒÌý²»µ½³Ðŵʱ³ÉÁ¢µÄ£¬¶øÊÇÔÚµÚ¶þ´ÎÎÒÌýµ½µÄʱºò³ÉÁ¢µÄ¡£Èç¹ûËûûÓÐÖظ´£¬ÔòºÏͬ²»³ÉÁ¢¡£ºÏͬ½öÔÚÎÒÌýµ½Ëû½ÓÊÜÒªÔ¼µÄ»Ø´ðºó²Å³ÉÁ¢¡£ ×îºó£¬Ì¸Ì¸µç´«¡£¼ÙÉèÂ׶ذ칫ÊÒµÄÒ»ÃûÖ°Ô±Ôڵ紫´ò×Ö»úÉÏ´ò³öÒ»·ÝÒªÔ¼£¬¸ÃÒªÔ¼Á¢¿Ì±»¼Ç¼ÔÚÂü³¹Ë¹Ìذ칫Êҵĵ紫´ò×Ö»úÉÏ£»Âü³¹Ë¹ÌØ·½µÄÖ°Ô±´ò³öÒ»·Ý³Ðŵ¡£Èç¹û³ÐŵµÄ¾ä×Ó·¢Ë͵½Ò»°ëʱÏß·¶ÏÁË£¬µç´«´ò×Ö»úÍ£Ö¹ÔËת£¬ÔòºÜÃ÷ÏÔ£¬ºÏͬ²»³ÉÁ¢¡£Âü³¹Ë¹ÌØ·½µÄÖ°Ô±±ØÐëÖØнÓͨ²¢·¢ËÍÍêÕûµÄ¾ä×Ó¡£µ«Ò²¿ÉÄÜ·¢ÉúÏß·û¶Î£¬¶øѶϢδ´«ÖÁÂ׶صÄÇé¿ö¡£±ÈÈ磬Âü³¹Ë¹ÌØ·½µÄÖ°Ô±´ò³öÁ˳Ðŵ£¬µ«ÓÉÓÚÂ׶ط½µç´«´ò×Ö»úûÓÐÄ«ÁË»òÆäËûÀàËÆÔÒò¶øûÓмͼÉÏ¡£ÔÚÕâÖÖÇé¿öÏ£¬Âü³¹Ë¹ÌصÄÖ°Ô±²»ÖªµÀûÓмǼÉÏ£¬¶øÂ׶صÄÖ°Ô±ÖªµÀÕâÖÖÇé¿ö²¢Á¢¼´»ØËÍ¡°Î´½ÓÊÜ¡±µÄѶϢ¡£ÓÚÊÇ£¬Ê§ÎóµÃµ½¾ÀÕý£¬Âü³¹Ë¹ÌØ·½µÄÖ°Ô±½«ÖØз¢ËÍѶϢ¡£ÔÚÕâ¸öʱºò£¬ºÏͬ²Å³ÉÁ¢¡£Èç¹ûÆäδÖØ·¢ÔòºÏͬ²»³ÉÁ¢¡£Ö±µ½Êܵ½Ñ¶Ï¢Ê±£¬ºÏͬ²Å³ÉÁ¢¡£ ÔÚÉÏÊöÌÖÂÛµÄËùÓÐÇé¿öÖУ¬·¢ËͳÐŵѶϢµÄÈËÖªµÀ»òÓ¦µ±ÖªµÀѶϢδ±»ÊÕµ½£¬Æä±ØÐëÖØз¢ËÍ¡£µ«ÊÇ£¬¼ÙÉèËû²»ÖªµÀѶϢûÓз¢ËͶøÒÔΪÒѾ·¢Ë͵½ÁË¡£Ò²ÓпÉÄÜ·¢ÉúÒÔÏÂÇé¿ö£ºÒªÔ¼ÈËÔڵ绰ÖÐûÓÐÌýµ½³Ðŵ£¬È´ÓÐûÓÐÒªÇó¶Ô·½Öظ´£»»òÕßÔÚ½ÓÊÜѶϢʱ£¬µç´«´ò×Ö»úµÄīˮûÁË£¬µ«Ö°Ô±Î´ÒªÇóÖØз¢ËÍѶϢ¡£Õâ¾ÍʹµÃ·¢³ö³ÐŵµÄÒ»·½µ±ÊÂÈ˺ÏÀíµÄÏàÐųÐŵÒѾ±»¶Ô·½ÊÕµ½¡£ÒªÔ¼ÈËÔÚÕâÖÖÇé¿öÏÂÏÔȻҪÊܵ½Ô¼Êø£¬ÒòΪËû²»ÄÜ·´ÑÔËûûÓÐÊÕµ½³ÐŵѶϢ£¬Ã»ÓÐÊÕµ½Ñ¶Ï¢ÊÇËû×Ô¼ºµÄ¹ýʧ¡£µ«ÊÇÈç¹ûÒªÔ¼ÈËÕâÒ»·½×ÔÉíÍêȫûÓйýʧ¶øûÓÐÊÕµ½³Ðŵ£¬¶ø·¢ËÍ·½ºÏÀíµØÈÏΪÒѾË͵½¡ª¡ªËäȻʵ¼ÊÉÏûÓÐË͵½£¬ÎÒÒ²ÈÏΪºÏͬ²»³ÉÁ¢¡£ ÎҵĽáÂÛÊÇ£¬ÔÚºÏͬ³ÉÁ¢µÄ¹ý³ÌÖУ¬µ±ÊÂÈ˼´Ê±Í¨Ñ¶µÄÇé¿öÊÇÓбðÓÚÓʵݵÄÇé¿öµÄ¡£ºÏͬ½öÔÚÒªÔ¼ÈËÊÕµ½³Ðŵʱ²ÅÉúЧ£¬ºÏͬµÄµÞÔ¼µØ¼´Îª³ÐŵÊÕµ½µØ¡£ Post by ˼ÔÆÁ÷ÄÏ @ 21:10