井盖_井盖敞开官司飞来

　　Anglo-American Tort Law 　　 　　编者按：随着2008年北京奥运会的临近，民众越来越关心“中国”品牌的树立，学习英语的热情也被点燃。越来越多的外宣干部和业内同行向我们表达了期待看到双语栏目的愿望。因此，我们自2006年第1期起开办了“双语视窗”栏目以满足广大读者的需求。
　　看看周围的媒体，在《北京青年报》、《参考消息》、《国门时报》上有许多精粹的小短文，像一只只啄木鸟，善意地提醒了中国人习以为常的行为背后“尚未和国际接轨”的细节，读后让人回味不已。在获得借鉴意义的同时，也带来更深入的思考。我们效仿中英文对照的版面形式，旨在通过外国友人的视角来看中国，从中折射出东西方观念、习俗的异同。通过一篇篇这样的文章，让读者在领略异域文化的同时，也能达到学习英语的目的。
　　
　　当我来到中国，首先注意到的一件事就是路面上的很多井口都敞着，我很快就学会了走路时低头看路免得掉下去。
　　这一现象之所以让我吃惊，是因为美国的井口决不会敞着，除非是有人在里面干活。此外，只要井口被打开，工人们就会在井口周围立起栏杆，以防行人掉下。
　　为什么美国人对打开的井口这么上心？答案与英美体系的民事侵权法有关。民事侵权大致可定义为伤害性行为，对这种行为法律允许受害者索取赔偿，而民事侵权法是针对这类伤害如何进行赔偿的一系列法律。让我们以路面井口为例：设想一个工人打开了井盖去修理地下电话线，他在下面工作一段时间后就去吃午饭，在他吃午饭期间一位妇女走过，没有注意到井口开着，掉了下去，腿摔成了骨折。
　　那么，随之而来的恐怕就是这位妇女起诉电话公司，声称那个工人太疏忽，没把井口盖上就离开了。她会要求法院判电话公司付她的医疗费，她还会以所遭受的“伤痛与困苦”为由而要求经济赔偿，而这一赔偿的数额有时是很巨大的，在某些极端案例中会大大超过一百万美元。虽说我们所举的这个例子不大可能导致如此巨额赔偿，但这位妇女可能要求法院对被告实行惩罚性损害赔偿，这是给予受伤一方超过应得赔偿的赔偿，以用来惩罚被告的疏忽。民事侵权法（特别是与伤痛和困苦相关的大额经济赔偿与惩罚性损害赔偿）对安全防护提供了经济驱动力，这就是为什么美国、加拿大、英国在安全意识方面比中国强的主要原因之一。人行道上的冰会被相关部门仔细地清除干净；公寓楼都设有火灾逃生户外楼梯；紧急出口总是开着；在汽车道上设有水泥电话线杆子。具有较强的安全意识固然是英美民事侵权法带来的好处，但这一法律体系也有它的负面作用，缺点之一就是对高额的法律诉讼费用的恐惧心理往往会妨碍或阻止某些有益的活动。举个例子吧，那是我来中国前的夏天，当时我正在米德尔伯力学院学习中文，该学院地处佛蒙特州。米德尔伯力位于乡村地区，远离城市的灯光，因此那儿的夜空颜色很深，美极了。作为一个业余天文爱好者，我想搞一些天文观测，最理想的观测地点就是校园里最高的那座楼的楼顶平台。但是，除了有一个晚上在那儿举行过一次招待会，其余时间通向平台的门总是锁着的。
　　有一天我正巧和校长聊了起来，我解释了天文观测的情况，并问他能否把通向平台的门打开。他摇摇头一脸愁容：“以前别人也向我提过这个要求，可我们不得不锁上这道门，这让我难受极了。必须上锁的原因在于，我们的律师说，除非我们能长年监视那里，否则就得锁上，如果有学生上了楼顶，从那儿跳下去自杀，学生家长极有可能起诉学校。”我不能责怪学校的这一做法，在美国的法律体系中，由这类事情引发的官司并不少见，虽说这在中国人看来可能有点不可思议。代表学生家长一方的律师会声称校方应该知道楼顶平台是有危险的，或声称校方没有在阻止学生自杀方面尽到责任。这样的官司可能会赢，也可能会输，但即使是校方赢了，学校也不得不花掉很多钱在法庭上为自己辩护。
　　对我来说，由于校方害怕打官司，我想充分享受米德尔伯力的夜空则不能如愿以偿，这看来令人遗憾。不过，在晚上走过校园时，我至少可以仰着头看天上的星星，而不必低着头看有没有开着的井口。
　　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!
　　（本栏目文章选自《北京青年报》“双语视窗”，得到栏目编辑张爱学的授权。英文部分的稿费由本编辑部支付，请作者本人看到此启事后与编辑部联系。）
　　责编：周瑾

相关热词搜索：井盖 官司 飞来 井盖敞开官司飞来 井盖敞开官司飞来 高考 井盖敞开官司飞来 素材