Anglo-American Tort Law 　　 　　編者按：隨著2008年北京奧運(yùn)會(huì)的臨近，民眾越來(lái)越關(guān)心“中國(guó)”品牌的樹(shù)立，學(xué)習(xí)英語(yǔ)的熱情也被點(diǎn)燃。越來(lái)越多的外宣干部和業(yè)內(nèi)同行向我們表達(dá)了期待看到雙語(yǔ)欄目的愿望。因此，我們自2006年第1期起開(kāi)辦了“雙語(yǔ)視窗”欄目以滿足廣大讀者的需求。
　　看看周?chē)�的媒體，在《北京青年報(bào)》、《參考消息》、《國(guó)門(mén)時(shí)報(bào)》上有許多精粹的小短文，像一只只啄木鳥(niǎo)，善意地提醒了中國(guó)人習(xí)以為常的行為背后“尚未和國(guó)際接軌”的細(xì)節(jié)，讀后讓人回味不已。在獲得借鑒意義的同時(shí)，也帶來(lái)更深入的思考。我們效仿中英文對(duì)照的版面形式，旨在通過(guò)外國(guó)友人的視角來(lái)看中國(guó)，從中折射出東西方觀念、習(xí)俗的異同。通過(guò)一篇篇這樣的文章，讓讀者在領(lǐng)略異域文化的同時(shí)，也能達(dá)到學(xué)習(xí)英語(yǔ)的目的。
　　
　　當(dāng)我來(lái)到中國(guó)，首先注意到的一件事就是路面上的很多井口都敞著，我很快就學(xué)會(huì)了走路時(shí)低頭看路免得掉下去。
　　這一現(xiàn)象之所以讓我吃驚，是因?yàn)槊绹?guó)的井口決不會(huì)敞著，除非是有人在里面干活。此外，只要井口被打開(kāi)，工人們就會(huì)在井口周?chē)�立起欄桿，以防行人掉下。
　　為什么美國(guó)人對(duì)打開(kāi)的井口這么上心？答案與英美體系的民事侵權(quán)法有關(guān)。民事侵權(quán)大致可定義為傷害性行為，對(duì)這種行為法律允許受害者索取賠償，而民事侵權(quán)法是針對(duì)這類傷害如何進(jìn)行賠償?shù)囊幌盗蟹�律。讓我們以路面井口為例：設(shè)想一個(gè)工人打開(kāi)了井蓋去修理地下電話線，他在下面工作一段時(shí)間后就去吃午飯，在他吃午飯期間一位婦女走過(guò)，沒(méi)有注意到井口開(kāi)著，掉了下去，腿摔成了骨折。
　　那么，隨之而來(lái)的恐怕就是這位婦女起訴電話公司，聲稱那個(gè)工人太疏忽，沒(méi)把井口蓋上就離開(kāi)了。她會(huì)要求法院判電話公司付她的醫(yī)療費(fèi)，她還會(huì)以所遭受的“傷痛與困苦”為由而要求經(jīng)濟(jì)賠償，而這一賠償?shù)臄?shù)額有時(shí)是很巨大的，在某些極端案例中會(huì)大大超過(guò)一百萬(wàn)美元。雖說(shuō)我們所舉的這個(gè)例子不大可能導(dǎo)致如此巨額賠償，但這位婦女可能要求法院對(duì)被告實(shí)行懲罰性損害賠償，這是給予受傷一方超過(guò)應(yīng)得賠償?shù)馁r償，以用來(lái)懲罰被告的疏忽。民事侵權(quán)法（特別是與傷痛和困苦相關(guān)的大額經(jīng)濟(jì)賠償與懲罰性損害賠償）對(duì)安全防護(hù)提供了經(jīng)濟(jì)驅(qū)動(dòng)力，這就是為什么美國(guó)、加拿大、英國(guó)在安全意識(shí)方面比中國(guó)強(qiáng)的主要原因之一。人行道上的冰會(huì)被相關(guān)部門(mén)仔細(xì)地清除干凈；公寓樓都設(shè)有火災(zāi)逃生戶外樓梯；緊急出口總是開(kāi)著；在汽車(chē)道上設(shè)有水泥電話線桿子。具有較強(qiáng)的安全意識(shí)固然是英美民事侵權(quán)法帶來(lái)的好處，但這一法律體系也有它的負(fù)面作用，缺點(diǎn)之一就是對(duì)高額的法律訴訟費(fèi)用的恐懼心理往往會(huì)妨礙或阻止某些有益的活動(dòng)。舉個(gè)例子吧，那是我來(lái)中國(guó)前的夏天，當(dāng)時(shí)我正在米德?tīng)柌�力學(xué)院學(xué)習(xí)中文，該學(xué)院地處佛蒙特州。米德?tīng)柌�力位于鄉(xiāng)村地區(qū)，遠(yuǎn)離城市的燈光，因此那兒的夜空顏色很深，美極了。作為一個(gè)業(yè)余天文愛(ài)好者，我想搞一些天文觀測(cè)，最理想的觀測(cè)地點(diǎn)就是校園里最高的那座樓的樓頂平臺(tái)。但是，除了有一個(gè)晚上在那兒舉行過(guò)一次招待會(huì)，其余時(shí)間通向平臺(tái)的門(mén)總是鎖著的。
　　有一天我正巧和校長(zhǎng)聊了起來(lái)，我解釋了天文觀測(cè)的情況，并問(wèn)他能否把通向平臺(tái)的門(mén)打開(kāi)。他搖搖頭一臉愁容：“以前別人也向我提過(guò)這個(gè)要求，可我們不得不鎖上這道門(mén)，這讓我難受極了。必須上鎖的原因在于，我們的律師說(shuō)，除非我們能長(zhǎng)年監(jiān)視那里，否則就得鎖上，如果有學(xué)生上了樓頂，從那兒跳下去自殺，學(xué)生家長(zhǎng)極有可能起訴學(xué)校。”我不能責(zé)怪學(xué)校的這一做法，在美國(guó)的法律體系中，由這類事情引發(fā)的官司并不少見(jiàn)，雖說(shuō)這在中國(guó)人看來(lái)可能有點(diǎn)不可思議。代表學(xué)生家長(zhǎng)一方的律師會(huì)聲稱校方應(yīng)該知道樓頂平臺(tái)是有危險(xiǎn)的，或聲稱校方?jīng)]有在阻止學(xué)生自殺方面盡到責(zé)任。這樣的官司可能會(huì)贏，也可能會(huì)輸，但即使是校方贏了，學(xué)校也不得不花掉很多錢(qián)在法庭上為自己辯護(hù)。
　　對(duì)我來(lái)說(shuō)，由于校方害怕打官司，我想充分享受米德?tīng)柌�力的夜空則不能如愿以償，這看來(lái)令人遺憾。不過(guò)，在晚上走過(guò)校園時(shí)，我至少可以仰著頭看天上的星星，而不必低著頭看有沒(méi)有開(kāi)著的井口。
　　原文：
　　When I first arrived in China, one of the first things I noticed was the abundance of open manholes in the streets. I soon learned to look down as I walked in order to avoid falling into one. This surprised me because in the United States, manholes are virtually never left open unless someone is working inside. Moreover, whenever a manhole is opened, the workers set up a safety fence around the hole to prevent anyone from falling in.
　　Why do Americans take such care with open manholes? The answer relates to the Anglo-American system of tort law. A “tort” may be loosely defined as a “harmful act” for which the law allows the victim to seek compensation, and tort law is the system of law that governs compensation for such harm.
　　Let’s take the manhole as an example. Imagine that a workman opens a manhole in order to repair a broken telephone line underground. After he works inside for a while, he leaves for lunch. While he is at lunch a woman walks by, fails to notice the open manhole and falls in, breaking her leg.
　　What is likely to happen is that the woman will file a lawsuit against the telephone company claiming that the workman was negligent (careless) in leaving the manhole uncovered. The woman would ask the court to order the telephone company to pay her medical bills. She would also ask for money to compensate her for the “pain and suffering” sheexperienced. This pain and suffering award can be quite large, in extreme cases well in excess of a million dollars, although the example given here would be unlikely to lead to such a large award. It is possible that she would also ask for punitive damages, which is an award of money given to the injured party in order to punish the defendant for its carelessness.
　　The tort law system (especially the large awards associated with pain and suffering and punitive damages) creates an economic incentive for safety. This is one of the main reasons why America, Canada and Britain are much more safety-conscious places than China. Ice is carefully removed from sidewalks. Apartment buildings have fire escapes.Emergency exits are left unblocked. There are no concrete telephone poles set in the roadways. Inducing greater awareness of safety is surely an advantage of the Anglo-American tort system.
　　But the system has its disadvantages as well. One drawback is that the fear of a costly lawsuit often hinders or prevents beneficial activities. Let me give you an example dating from the summer before I came to China, when I was studying Chinese at Middlebury College in Vermont. Middlebury is located in a rural area, far from city lights, and so the night sky there is beautifully dark. As an amateur astronomer I wanted to do some binocular astronomy. The perfect place was the rooftop terrace of the campus’tallest building. But except for one evening when a reception was being held there, the door to the terrace was always kept locked.
　　One day I happened to be talking to the college president, and I explained the situation. I asked if the door could be left unlocked. He shook his head sadly. “I’ve gotten this request before,” he said,“and I feel terrible that we have to keep the door locked. The reason is that our lawyers say we have to keep the door locked unless there’s
　　a supervised activity going on there. If someone were on the rooftop, jumped off the roof and died, the person’s family might well sue the college.”
　　I can’t blame the college for its policy crazy as it may sound to the Chinese, a lawsuit stemming from such an incident would not be unusual in the American legal system. The lawyers representing the student’s family might claim that the college should have known that the rooftop terrace was a safety hazard, or they might claim that the college failed to do enough to prevent the student from attempting suicide. The lawsuit might or might not succeed, but even if the college won, it would have to spend a considerable sum of money defending itself in court.
　　It seemed sad to me that the fear of a lawsuit prevented me from enjoying the night sky over Middlebury as much as I would have liked. But at least when I walked across the campus in the evenings I could look up at the stars instead of looking down to watch for open manholes!
　　（本欄目文章選自《北京青年報(bào)》“雙語(yǔ)視窗”，得到欄目編輯張愛(ài)學(xué)的授權(quán)。英文部分的稿費(fèi)由本編輯部支付，請(qǐng)作者本人看到此啟事后與編輯部聯(lián)系。）
　　責(zé)編：周瑾

相關(guān)熱詞搜索：井蓋 官司 飛來(lái) 井蓋敞開(kāi)官司飛來(lái) 井蓋敞開(kāi)官司飛來(lái) 高考 井蓋敞開(kāi)官司飛來(lái) 素材