【正文】 errelated questions. If merchant judges decide disputes according to merchant practices that are somehow outside of law, what is the nature of those merchant practices? If the Law Merchant is primarily about merchant practice, why is it referred to as the “Law” Merchant? If Law Merchant judges base their decisions on conceptions of fairness and goodness, do they derive those conceptions from merchant practices, or additionally from precepts that transcend those practices? （對(duì)商法根本不是法律，而是商業(yè)慣例這一提議提出了若干相互關(guān)聯(lián)的問題。如果商事法官根據(jù)法律之外的商業(yè)慣例解決爭(zhēng)議，那這些商業(yè)慣例的性質(zhì)是什么？如果商法主要是商業(yè)慣例，那它為什么被稱為“法”？如果商人法官建立公平和善良的原則上，那么這些原則是起源于商業(yè)慣例還是起源于超越實(shí)踐的規(guī)則呢？）New Words and Proper Termsmerchant law 商事法 municipal law　　國(guó)內(nèi)法stratify vt. 分層；成層；使形成階層remedies　 n. 救濟(jì)方法bailiff n. 法警；執(zhí)行官；區(qū)鎮(zhèn)的地方長(zhǎng)官reverence n. 崇敬；尊嚴(yán)sheriff n. 郡治安官；執(zhí)行吏itinerant n. 巡回者；行商exemption n. 免除，豁免；免稅 surrogate n. 代理；代用品；遺囑檢驗(yàn)法官guild　　 n. 協(xié)會(huì)，行會(huì)；同業(yè)公會(huì)coffer n. 保險(xiǎn)箱，金庫(kù)suitor n. 起訴人stricto sensu (拉) 在嚴(yán)格的意義上, 嚴(yán)格地說ex aequo et bono (拉)公平合理的原則第六單元?dú)W洲統(tǒng)一銷售法的實(shí)質(zhì)范圍1 In some respects, the substantive scope of the regime(制度) set out in the CESL reflects the restrictions（限制） as to the subjectmatter of the contracts（合同標(biāo)的物） for which it is available, as can be seen in those of its provisions（規(guī)定，條款） governing the obligations and remedies of parties to the particular types of contract in question（討論中的） (Parts IV and V of the CESL). However, there is a further sense in which the CESL is restricted in its scope, for while its general contract law provisions（一般合同法則） deal with many aspects of ‘the life of the contract,’（合同有效期） it does not deal with all of them.在某些方面，歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法中的實(shí)體法范圍制度的設(shè)立反映了對(duì)該合同標(biāo)的物的限定是可行的，可以從其規(guī)定的義務(wù)和當(dāng)事人救濟(jì)問題的特定類型的合同體現(xiàn)出來（歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法的第IV和V部分）。然而，還有另外一個(gè)深遠(yuǎn)的意義是，在歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法中，其主要是限制范圍，而一般合同法則側(cè)重于規(guī)定處理合同效力的各個(gè)方面。2 First, while the CESL contains rules governing the formation of a contract（管理合同成立的規(guī)則） (containing rules on precontractual information（先合同信息規(guī)則） and on offer and acceptance(要約和承諾規(guī)則) ), it does not contain any rule governing the relations between parties who have not or have not quite concluded a contract: 首先，雖然歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法包含管理合同成立的規(guī)則（包含在先合同信息規(guī)則和對(duì)要約和承諾規(guī)則），它不包含關(guān)于雙方當(dāng)事人之間沒有締結(jié)合同關(guān)系的任何規(guī)則；the rules in the DCFR（共同參考框架草案管理責(zé)任的規(guī)則） governing liability（責(zé)任） in respect of negotiations contrary to good faith and fair dealing (including where negotiations are broken off) are not found in the CESL, even though they did appear in its precursor, the Feasibility Study. 在談判中違反誠(chéng)實(shí)信用和公平交易的共同參考框架草案管理責(zé)任的規(guī)則（包括談判中斷）并未在歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法中被發(fā)現(xiàn)，即使他們出現(xiàn)在它的前體并進(jìn)行了可行性研究。 This does not mean, however, that the article in CESL does not include any obligations or liabilities which would normally be classified as noncontractual,（非契約） that is, arising other than（不同于，除了） from nonperformance of a contractual obligation. 然而，這并不意味著，在歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法的條款中不包含任何義務(wù)或責(zé)任，這通常被歸類為非契約，也就是說，產(chǎn)生其他從合同義務(wù)的不履行責(zé)任 In particular, the CESL imposes a number of duties of precontractual information owed by one contracting party to another and then provides that a party which has failed to ply with any duty to provide precontractual information（售前合同信息） ‘is liable for any loss caused to the other party by such a failure.’ 特別地，歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法對(duì)一些先合同信息即由締約一方應(yīng)承擔(dān)未能為對(duì)方提供售前合同信息而造成其任何損失產(chǎn)生的責(zé)任。In this respect, the Proposal (as distinct from the CESL) explicitly states that ‘provided that（假如） the contract was actually concluded, the Common European Sales Law shall govern the pliance with（遵守，符合） and remedies for failure to ply with the precontractual information duties’ and the recitals treat this liability as noncontractual within the meaning of Rome II. 在這方面，建議（不同于CESL）明確指出，“只要這個(gè)合同實(shí)際上是成立的，歐洲共同銷售法應(yīng)治理遵守和補(bǔ)救未能遵守先合同信息的責(zé)任等同于非契約在羅馬法II中的意義。 The CESL also contains rules governing restitution（賠償） following the avoidance or termination of the contract（合同終止） by either party: the ‘obligation to return what was received’（ “返還原物的義務(wù)）would be classified both by civil lawyers and mon lawyers as noncontractual rather than contractual and would also fall within（屬于） Rome II. CESL還包含規(guī)制賠償后合同無效或終止合同任何一方的規(guī)則：“返還原物的義務(wù)無論是民事律師和普通律師都將其歸類為非合同義務(wù)而不是合同義務(wù)，同樣也屬于羅馬II的部分。3 Secondly, certain substantive matters（實(shí)質(zhì)問題） are excluded from the CESL39。s scope. 第二，某些實(shí)體法范圍？被排除在CESL的范圍之外。Recital 27 states that ‘the matters of a contractual or noncontractual nature that are not addressed’ in the CESL: … include legal personality,（法人資格） the invalidity of a contract（無效合同） arising from lack of capacity, illegality or immorality, the determination of the language of the contract,（缺乏意思表示能力而導(dǎo)致無效合同）matters of nondiscrimination, representation, plurality of debtors and creditors（存在多個(gè)債務(wù)人和債權(quán)人的問題）, change of parties including assignment, setoff and merger,（抵消和并購(gòu)） property law including the transfer of ownership, intellectual property law and the law of torts. Furthermore, the issue of whether concurrent contractual and noncontractual liability claims（索賠） can be pursued together falls outside the scope of the Common European Sales Law. 詳述27條明確指出，在歐洲統(tǒng)一銷售法中，“以下關(guān)于契約性或非契約性的問題”未明確規(guī)定：...包括主體資格問題，由于缺乏相應(yīng)的法律行為能力，或者因非法或不道德，或者因缺乏意思表示能力而導(dǎo)致無效合同，關(guān)于非歧視性問題、代表性問題，存在多個(gè)債務(wù)人和債權(quán)人的問題，合同各方轉(zhuǎn)讓、抵銷，包括所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移的物權(quán)法以及知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法和侵權(quán)法的相關(guān)問題。此外，關(guān)于并發(fā)合同和非合同責(zé)任索賠是否可以追求共同的問題，也是歐洲共同銷售法的范疇之外的問題。4 These matters therefore fall to be determined（有待決定） by the national law (aside from（除。以外） the CESL, which the Proposal terms（條款） ‘preexisting（先已存在的） national law’) identified by the forum39。s relevant conflict of law rules, these being principally the Rome I and Rome II Regulations. It will be noticed that the list is explicitly stated as being an inclusive rather than an exclusive one,（包容而非排他性的）and some of its contents give rise to uncertainty (how can the law of torts be altogether excluded from the scope of the instrument given the inclusion of liability for breach（違約責(zé)任） of precontractual information duties? （先合同信息義務(wù)？）) and substantive difficulty (as in the case of the exclusion of ‘illegality or immorality’). 因此這些問題由國(guó)家的法律具體規(guī)定（除了CESL，即有現(xiàn)已存在的國(guó)家法）通過法律規(guī)則有關(guān)沖突的識(shí)別，這些主要是羅馬I和羅馬II的規(guī)定。應(yīng)當(dāng)注意到，該列表被明確聲明其為一個(gè)包容而非排他性的，并且它的一