　　《當代法律英語（2008年修訂）》由四位從事法律英語教學多年的教師共同完成，內容涉及各法律部門，並且不局限於特定的國彆法（如美國法）。課文附有mp3格式的錄音材料。除瞭貼近時代脈搏和強調專業英語的實際運用外（如普通法判例閱讀技巧、法律資料檢索及研究技巧、反垃圾郵件的法律規則、WTO法律規則、涉及美國總統剋林頓彈劾案的國會辯論材料、國際人權法等），她延續瞭原《現代法律英語》樸實清新的的傳統。

作者簡介

　　黃瑤，中山大學法學學士和法學碩士，北京大學法學博士。1997-1998年美國華盛頓大學法學院訪問學者，2001年海牙國際法研究院第29屆海外講習班學員（馬尼拉）。現為中山大學法學院教授、中山大學法學理論與法律實踐研究中心研究員，中國國際法學會常務理事。有關法律語方麵的著述有：《現代法律英語》（閤編著，中山大學齣版社1997年版）、《法律英語實務——中外法律文書編譯》（第二作者，中山大學齣版社2005年版）等。
　　陳東，1992年本科畢業於北京大學國際經濟係，2001年獲廈門大學法學博士學位，現為中山大學法學院副教授，中國國際經濟法學會理事。承擔中山大學法學院與境外若乾大學閤作培養項目的大部分專業講座（全英文授課），法國裏昂第三大學法學院訪問學者（為該院本科三年級學生及研究生授課）。作為教練及領隊參加全國模擬法庭比賽和維也納國際商事仲裁比賽（受邀為第14、15屆比賽仲裁員）。獲第十屆霍英東教育基金會全國高等院校青年教師奬。涉及法律英語的代錶著作是《英國公司法上的董事“受信義務”》，《論詐欺和欺詐——兼議法律語言的通俗化》（與巢誌雄閤著）。

Unit One Preparation for Legal Education
Unit Two The Legal Profession
Unit Three World Legal Systems
Unit Four Public Law
Unit Five Priveates of Common Law
Unit Six Basic Principles of Common Law
Unit Seven Common Law and Equity
Unit Eight The English and the American Court Systen
Unit Nine The Sources of Criminal Law
Unit Ten Crimianl Procedure
Unit Eleven Civil Procedure
Unit Twlve Nature and Classes of Contracts
Unit Thiisteen Introduction to Americal Uniform Commercial Code
Uint Fourteen Law of Torts
Unit Fifteen What is Trust?
Unit Sixteen Trademarks,Serivce Marks and Copyrights
Unit Seventeen Patents,Secret Business Information,Protection of Compurter Software and Mask Work
Unit Eighteen A Comparative Analysis of Spam Laws:the Quest for Model Law
Uunit Nineteen Law of Corporations
Unit Twenty Law of Bankruptcy
Unit Twenty-one Securities Regulation
Unit Twenty-two Employment Law
Unit Twenty-three Land law
Unit Twenty-four Administrative Law
Unit Twenty-five Sources of International Law
Unit Twenty-six The World Trade Organization(I)
Unit Twety-seven The World Trade Organization(II)
Unit Twenty-eight The World Trade Organization(III)
Unit Twenty-nine The Evolution of the Meaning of the Term Investment
Unit Thirty The OECD Guidelines for Multinatinal conflict of Laws
Unit Thirty-one Nature and Scope of the Conflict of Laws
Unit Thirty-two Internatonal Sales Transation(I)
Unit Thirty-three International Sales Transaction(II)
Unit Thirty-four Typesn and Rules of International Commercial Arbitration
Unit Thiret-five Internatonal Human Rights Law
Unit Thiret-six The Changing Balance in Autitrust Law
Unit Thirty-seven Constiutionl Law
Unit Thirty-eight The Legal Research Process
主要參考書目及網上資源
附錄1 法律詞匯英漢對照錶
附錄2 練習參考答案

精彩書摘

A thousand years ago the only sources of law were the basic dictates of humanity and localcustoms. After the Norman Conquest of 1066 the Royal judges attempted to apply a common law tothe whole country. The law was based partly on the Norman law. They brought with them fromFrance and partly on English customs which they found to be widespread or 'general'
The creation of this common law, however, was strictly on an ad hoc basis, each problembeing settled as it arose. No one actually sat down to compile a list of the laws. How then werepeople to know what was a crime, or in the event of a dispute between citizens, what were therespective rights of each citizen? Indeed, how are they to know these things now?
The is answer two-fold.
Firstly, a small number of very old legal textbooks, compiled from the twelfth centuryonwards, have survived into the present day.
Secondly, and very much more important, there is the doctrine of judicial precedent.Stated simply, this means that in their work of settling disputes, judges are guided by thedecisions of judges in earlier similar cases. So, if a case which is to be tried today is similar to acase tried last week, its result is likely to be the same. In this way a body of legal principles hasbeen built up, which may be discovered by examining the judgments in all cases tried to date. Forthis reason ' precedent' is often referred to as ' case-law' or as stare decisis.
It is sometimes said that in reaching his decision a judge is merely declaring what the commonlaw has always been. But where a judge has to make a decision on a point of law which has neverarisen before in any court, this view seems a little unrealistic, and the judge appears actually tobe creating law——hence the expression 'judge-made law' for judicial precedent.
When a judge simply applies to the facts of one particular case a legal rule previouslyenunciated in an earlier trial, his decision is known as a declaratory precedent, because itdeclares existing law. On the other hand, if the case is unlike any previous one, so that it iswithout precedent, then the judge must make up his own mind what the common law is or shouldbe.
……