Pre-U CIE Law: Legal Terminology Memorisation Guide | Pre-U CIE 法律：词汇术语速记指南

📚 Pre-U CIE Law: Legal Terminology Memorisation Guide | Pre-U CIE 法律：词汇术语速记指南

Mastering legal terminology is essential for success in the Cambridge Pre-U Law syllabus. This guide breaks down critical terms from criminal law, tort, contract, and the legal system, pairing definitions with simple memory aids to accelerate your recall under exam conditions.

掌握法律术语是剑桥 Pre-U 法律课程成功的关键。本指南拆解了刑法、侵权法、合同法以及法律制度中的关键术语，将定义与简单的记忆辅助工具配对，帮助你在考试条件下快速回忆。

---

1. Actus Reus and Mens Rea | 犯罪行为与犯罪意图

In criminal law, establishing liability generally requires proof of both a guilty act (actus reus) and a guilty mind (mens rea). Actus reus can include an act, omission, or state of affairs, while mens rea covers intention, recklessness, or negligence.

在刑法中，确立责任通常需要同时证明犯罪行为（actus reus）和犯罪意图（mens rea）。犯罪行为可包括作为、不作为或状态，而犯罪意图则涵盖故意、轻率或疏忽。

Actus reus (Latin for ‘guilty act’) refers to the physical element of a crime. It must be voluntary; for example, a reflex action does not constitute actus reus. Omissions can count only where a duty of care exists, such as a parent’s duty to a child.

Actus reus（拉丁语“有罪的行为”）指犯罪的客观要素。它必须是自愿的；例如，反射动作不构成犯罪行为。不作为仅在存在注意义务时才构成犯罪，如父母对子女的义务。

Memory tip: Think ‘Actus’ = ‘Action’, and picture the accused actually doing something. To remember the omission rule, use the phrase: ‘No duty, no liability’.

记忆技巧：将 ‘Actus’ 联想为 ‘动作’，想象被告确实做了某件事。要记住不作为规则，使用口诀：“无义务，无责任”。

Mens rea (Latin for ‘guilty mind’) is the mental state required for a crime. The highest form is intention (direct or oblique), followed by recklessness (awareness of an unjustifiable risk), and sometimes gross negligence.

Mens rea（拉丁语“有罪的心理”）是犯罪所要求的主观状态。最高形式是故意（直接或间接），其次是轻率（意识到不合理的风险仍为之），有时还包括严重疏忽。

Recall aid: ‘Mens’ sounds like ‘mental’. Associate intention with a target that you aim at directly; recklessness with driving too fast in fog and not caring about the outcome.

回忆辅助：’Mens’ 听起来像 ‘mental’（心理）。将故意与直接瞄准的目标联系起来；轻率则如同在雾中开快车且不在乎后果。

---

2. Strict Liability | 严格责任

Some offences do not require mens rea; these are strict liability crimes. They are usually regulatory or public welfare offences where proving the act alone is enough, even if the defendant took all reasonable precautions.

有些罪行不要求犯罪意图；这些是严格责任犯罪。它们通常是监管性或公共福利犯罪，仅证明行为本身即足够，即使被告已采取所有合理预防措施。

Strict liability means liability without fault. Typical examples include selling alcohol to a minor, food safety violations, and many traffic offences. The policy rationale is to protect the public by imposing high standards of care.

严格责任意味着无过错的归责。典型例子包括向未成年人售酒、食品安全违规以及许多交通违法。政策依据是通过施加高标准的注意来保护公众。

Memory hook: ‘Strict’ as in a strict parent who punishes you even if you had good intentions. The only defence is often ‘due diligence’ or that the offence didn’t occur.

记忆钩子：’Strict’ 如同严厉的家长，即使你有善意也要惩罚你。唯一的抗辩通常是“尽职调查”或罪行并未发生。

---

3. Negligence in Tort Law | 侵权法中的过失侵权

The tort of negligence requires proof of three core elements: a duty of care, a breach of that duty, and damage caused by the breach. The classic case is Donoghue v Stevenson, which established the neighbour principle for duty of care.

过失侵权要求证明三个核心要素：注意义务、违反该义务以及由违反行为造成的损害。经典案例是 Donoghue v Stevenson，该案确立了注意义务的“邻人原则”。

To establish duty, the court applies the neighbour test: you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that you can reasonably foresee would injure your neighbour. A neighbour is someone closely and directly affected by your actions.

要确立注意义务，法院适用“邻人检验”：你必须采取合理注意，避免可以合理预见会伤害你邻人的作为或不作为。邻人是指直接受到你行为密切影响的人。

Breach occurs when the defendant falls below the standard of a reasonable person. Factors include the likelihood of harm, seriousness of potential injury, cost of precautions, and social utility of the activity.

当被告的行为未达到合理人的标准时即构成违反。考虑因素包括损害发生的可能性、潜在伤害的严重性、预防措施的成本以及活动的社会效益。

The damage must be caused by the breach, both factually (the ‘but for’ test) and legally (the harm must not be too remote). Wagon Mound No 1 illustrates the remoteness rule: damage must be reasonably foreseeable.

损害必须由违反义务所导致，既包括事实因果关系（“若无则不”检验），也包括法律因果关系（损害不能过于遥远）。Wagon Mound No 1 案说明了遥远性规则：损害必须是合理可预见的。

Memorisation acronym: DBD – Duty, Breach, Damage. Think of a DBD triangle. For the ‘but for’ test, imagine a button: but for pressing it, the accident wouldn’t happen.

记忆缩写：DBD —— Duty（义务）、Breach（违反）、Damage（损害）。想象一个 DBD 三角。对于“若无则不”检验，想象一个按钮：如果没有按下它，事故就不会发生。

---

4. Causation: Factual and Legal | 因果关系：事实与法律

Factual causation is the ‘but for’ test: but for the defendant’s conduct, would the result have occurred? Legal causation requires that the defendant’s action be a substantial and operating cause, and any intervening act may break the chain of causation.

事实因果关系适用“若无则不”检验：如果没有被告的行为，结果会发生吗？法律因果关系要求被告的行为是实质性且起作用的致因，任何介入行为都可能中断因果链条。

The ‘thin skull’ rule:

Published by TutorHao | Pre-U 法律 Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）