Jump asked in 社會與文化語言 · 1 decade ago

英文文章翻譯中文-----((急))20點

盡量是人工翻譯,不要用翻譯工具翻譯直接貼上來,謝謝。

While the person is a “technical trespasser,” the courts will view these individuals in an “in-between” status and consider other standards as they relate to the care owed the visitor. They are sometimes defined as public invitees or simply non-paying visitors who are on the premises at the invitation of the owner.

Warning signs have to impact on the non-reader, and fences are meant to be climbed in the eyes of children. In the case of trespassing children, the attractive nuisance doctrine applies.

These provisions usually do not apply to natural conditions, only to artificial conditions. The words “attractive nuisance” may not be used in some jurisdictions, having been replaced by the “foreseeability doctrine,” but the important principle still remains—children fit into a separate category when it comes to the trespass category of visitors.

A public recreation property maintains a fishing pond in the middle of its property. The park closes to the public during the winter months and posts signs indicating that the area is closed—no trespassing. There are a number of children who live near the park in a suburban neighborhood. Children commonly go into the park for sledding and ice skating on the pond. A child falls through the ice and is drowned. The property owner would be subject to suit because they know children were trespassing, and the owner should have reasonably determined (it was foreseeable) that there were times that the children would be endangered by thin ice.

1 Answer

Rating
  • 1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    While the person is a “technical trespasser,” the courts will view these individuals in an “in-between” status and consider other standards as they relate to the care owed the visitor. They are sometimes defined as public invitees or simply non-paying visitors who are on the premises at the invitation of the owner.

    當這個人是”技術性侵權者”時,由於這些侵權者未對到訪者盡到關心照顧的責任,因此法院會參酌其他標準,並以中間人的立場來看待這些侵權者。這些在邀請函主人土地上的到訪者,有時被定義為『公開被邀請者』或單純定義為『未付費參觀者』。

    Warning signs have to impact on the non-reader, and fences are meant to be climbed in the eyes of children. In the case of trespassing children, the attractive nuisance doctrine applies.

    警告標示必須能對無法閱讀的人有作用,而圍籬在孩童的眼中是用來攀爬的。因此在孩童侵入的案件中,便可主張引誘入侵的原理。

    These provisions usually do not apply to natural conditions, only to artificial conditions. The words “attractive nuisance” may not be used in some jurisdictions, having been replaced by the “foresee ability doctrine,” but the important principle still remains—children fit into a separate category when it comes to the trespass category of visitors.

    這些規定只對人為設定的情況有效,但通常不適用在一般的情形。不過『引誘入侵』一詞,可能無法被用在一些將『可預見原理』列入審判的考量。不論如何,最重要的原則仍然存在→當孩童被歸類為入侵的到訪者時,便適用另一種獨立的區別。

    A public recreation property maintains a fishing pond in the middle of its property. The park closes to the public during the winter months and posts signs indicating that the area is closed—no trespassing. There are a number of children who live near the park in a suburban neighborhood. Children commonly go into the park for sledding and ice skating on the pond. A child falls through the ice and is drowned. The property owner would be subject to suit because they know children were trespassing, and the owner should have reasonably determined (it was foreseeable) that there were times that the children would be endangered by thin ice.

    一個大眾娛樂花園在其物件中央保有一個釣魚池。在冬天時,這個公園不對外開放,並樹立告示牌標示這區域是關閉的→盡止進入。在公園鄰近郊區仍住一些孩童。他們通常會到公園裡面玩雪橇,並在湖面溜冰。當有一個孩童掉進湖面的冰而溺斃。這資產的所有人就會被提告,因為他們應該要知道孩童們會侵入,且資產所有人應能做出合理的推斷 (由於可預見孩童進入遊玩) 湖面的的薄冰極有可能會對孩童們造成危險。

    Source(s): 自己
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.