香港新浪網 MySinaBlog
« 上一篇 | 下一篇 »
John | 4th Feb 2011, 01:21 AM | 法律英語 | (781 Reads)

想談三種法律推理和寫法。第一種是if p, then q的寫法。第二種是if not p, then not qnot q, unless p的寫法。第三種是negation of ‘if p, then q’ 的寫法。

This post deals with three types of legal reasoning and writing, namely (i) if p, then q; (ii) if not p, then not q or not q, unless p; and (iii) the negation of “if p, then q”. 

在邏輯學上,pq都叫命題(propositions)p叫前項(antecedent)或者假設(hypothesis/assumption)q叫後項(consequent)或者結論(conclusion)

In logic, both p and q are propositions, and p stands for the antecedent (or hypothesis or assumption), while q is called consequent or conclusion.  

第一種寫法if p, then qp → q
第二種寫法if not p, then not qnot q, unless p~p ~q
第三種寫法negation of ‘if p, then q’~(p → q)

 Examples of if p, then q:

1.          If a proxy appointed in a directive accepted the appointment in writing prior to the maker of the directive becoming incapable, then the appointment of the proxy is valid. (如果代表在指令發出者喪失行為能力之前以書面接受了委任,則該代表的委任有效。)

2.          If Mr. Chan is disqualified but continues to act as director, then he will be personally liable for the debts and obligations of your company. (如果陳先生已經不符合董事資格但仍繼續擔任董事,他就須要對公司的債務和義務承擔個人責任。) 

Examples of if not p, then not q and not q, unless p

1.          If a proxy appointed in a directive did not accept the appointment in writing prior to the maker of the directive becoming incapable, then the appointment of the proxy is invalid. (if not p, then not q) (如果代表在指令發出者喪失行為能力之前未曾以書面接受委任,則該代表的委任無效。)

2.          No variation of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by the Parties or on their behalf by their authorized representatives. (not q, unless p) (本協議的任何修改,除非以書面方式作出並經各方的授權代表簽署,否則無效。) 

Examples of negation of ‘if p, then q’ (即對‘if p, then q’的推理作出否定)

1.          A person shall not be taken to have notice of any matter merely because of its being disclosed in any document kept by the Companies Registry. (不能只因為某事已在公司註冊處備存的文件中披露,就認為某人應該已經接到有關通知。)

2.          A person is not debarred from obtaining damages from a company by reason only of his holding shares in the company. (不能只因為某人持有一家公司的股份就認為某人不得向該公司索取損害賠償。)

3.          The court held that the defendant could not be restrained from using the tradename ‘Eat Together’ (大家食) on the grounds of infringement of copyright, since the single name ‘Café De Carol’ (大家樂) could not be qualified as an original literary work. (法庭裁定,不應以侵犯版權作理由阻止被告使用大家食(Eat Together)的商業名稱,因為大家樂(Café De Carol)是個簡單名稱,不符合構成原創文學作品的標準) 

Picture唔好講粗口(但講Delay no more就可以),要有品味(但搞無品密室政治就可以),要和平理性(但背信棄義出賣選民都算理性)

引用(0) | 話題(英文)