厦门大学2003年招收攻读博士学位研究生 ]sB%j@G
/@LUD=
入 学 考 试 试 题 (<Kf
4ZT0~37(
8fb<hq<
kY~o3p<
招生专业: 国际法 考试科目:民法与罗马法 kfkcaj4l]
2nB{oF-Z
研究方向: 国际民商法 [4\n(/
;0O>$|kg
注意:答案必须标明题号,按序写在专用答题纸上,写在本试卷上或草稿纸上者一律不给分。
TsI%M
cGv
`%
wv&%09U
C\1x3
以下4题,选做两题,每题50分,第1题必做. c(lG_"q6
%d#j%=
w(!COu
c+G%o8
1、论人身关系 h@D!/PS
l1"*
2、论财团法人 m+pFU?<|
3;wOA4ur
3、论亲权 .2QZe8"
k '-5&Q
4、论遗嘱自由 :<R"Kk@
8'0I$Qa4
pXoT@[}
*ZV=4[#bT
]Jx_bs~g
G[a&r
说明: p!H'JNG
lVo}D
FZ
9wpV} .(
rFG_CC2
*要求每道题都以论文的形式解答,除了观点能自圆其说外,还要求文字流畅、论证扎实、层次分明,不能以依序数罗列要点的方式答题。 U$=#yg2
:
|HA1.Y=
*不分别就民法和罗马法出题,对每道题的解答,都必须同时涉及到罗马法和现代民法,两者各占每题分数的一半。
i
5Dq'wp
EOzw&M];r
mD go@f
-=a,FDeR
Xx
e07J~
[^eQGv[S
厦大法学院2002年度国际法专业国际民商法研究方向博士生入学考试之“国际私法”试题 raB',Vp
T<K/bzB3z
论述题(每小题25分,共100分) N7mYE
1、从私人、社会和国家之间的关系分析法律选择中的当事人“意思自治”原则。 .[C@p`DZ
2、如何适用最密切联系原则? /=S\v<z
3、试述国际民事管辖权冲突(国际民事诉讼竞合)的解决方法。 ECr}7R%
4、试论中国区际冲突法的立法模式。 P|QM0GI
O("13cU
{P!1VYs
5
F$te5 `a
Q ?R3aJ
2002年度国际法专业国际民商法研究方向博士生民法·罗马法考试试题 eizni\
V&Q_iE
一、论述题(以下4题,选做两题,每题50分,第1题必做) cE+Y#jB
]jgMN7
1、 论人格权 7)dCdO
2、 论制定中国民法典 4{CeV7
3、 论所有权的客体 L^xh5{
4、 论债的本质和功能 I T?~`vi
fHiS'R
LW!>_~g-
说明: k\KI#.>
}0AoV&75
*要求每道题都以论文的形式解答,除了观点能自圆其说外,还要求文字流畅、论证扎实、层次分明,不能以依序数罗列要点的方式答题。 ^"] ]rZ)
*不分别就民法和罗马法出题,对每道题的解答,都必须同时涉及到罗马法和现代民法。 Ox9M![fC
8'#L+$O &N
x,LYfy"0
vE&K!k`
,Rdw]O
厦大法学院2000年硕士研究生入学考试民法试卷 /Csk"IfuO
民法试卷(研2000)
=B0AG9Fz
K@tEL Yb
一、名词解释(4*5,20分) BKKW3PT
rUh2[z8:
1、抗辩权 a g6[Nk
vOo-jUKs
2、宣告死亡 ~Z' /b|x<3
E?S
3、过错 L [&|<<c
/<1zzeHRSD
4、复代理 Tly*i"[&
.S[M:<<*
5、专利权 =rA]kGx
KzQuLD(e
二、简答题(4*10,40分) jE
n9T
IO7cRg'-F
1、简述法人的成立条件 Qt>Bvu Q
)v\ A8)[
2、简述相邻关系的种类和处理原则 /sr.MT
E]W
:
3、简述民法对所有权的保护 F
},kfCFF
#J^ >7v
4、我国法定继承人的范围和顺序 ce:wF#Qs
Kx02 2rgDU
三、法条解释(20分) a fLE9
Zn:]?%afdO
1、《合同法》第54条第二款:一方以欺诈、胁迫的手段或者乘人之危,使对方在违背真实意思的情况下订立的合同,受损害方有权请求人民法院或者仲裁机构变更或者撤销。 ;@qQ^!g2
lib}
dk
四、论述题(20分) =^z*p9ZB
;
W$.>*O
《合同法》与合同自由原则 ?}HZJ@:lB
#'.
' |z
3gYtu-1
~:*V'/2k
厦大法学院2002年度国际法专业国际民商法研究方向博士生入学考试之“专业外语”试题 MzF,is
.
LeS-
请将下列材料翻译成汉语: =3PZGdWD
CONDITIONS 9'p*7o
N{<5)L~Y
Q.Y
6
JOyM#g9-?
A. EXPRESS CONDITIONS 89t"2|9 u
2fXwJG'
IN RE CARTER’S CLAIM (
yoF
s
GE%zCB
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1957. jI~$iDdOfs
,+X:#$
390 Pa. 365, 134 A.2d 908. ^
S 45!mSb
wbI1~/
{asq[;]
%3.
np
Before CHARLES ALVIN JONES, C. J., and BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO, ARNOLD, BENJAMIN R. JONES and COHEN, JJ. x4,[5N"}YK
wUL 5"\
BENJAMIN R. JONES, Justice. TP/bX&bjCy
"~KTLf
This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon an arbitrator’s award in a proceeding under the Act of 1927. -Rx;"J.H
Ucz=\dO1
In June 1954 the Edwin J. Schoettle Co., a Pennsylvania corporation, and its six subsidiaries were available for purchase. Lester L. Kardon, interested in purchasing the company and five of its subsidiaries, opened negotiations for that purpose. The negotiations extended from June 24, 1954 to September 17, 1954, on which latter date the parties entered into a written agreement under the terms of which Kardon (hereinafter called the buyer) purchased all the issued and outstanding capital stock of Schoettle Co. and all its subsidiaries (hereinafter called sellers). The total purchase price set forth in the agreement of sale (excluding certain real estate) was $2,100,000 of which amount $187,863.60 was set aside under paragraph 11 of the agreement to be held by the provident Trust Company of Philadelphia as escrow agent to indemnify the buyer against “the liabilities of sellers by reason of any and all provisions of this agreement.” RL
H!f1cta
bf.yA:~U
The present litigation arises form the fact that the buyer has presented a claim against the escrow fund for $69,998.42 as a “liability” of the seller under the agreement. Payment of this claim having been disputed by the sellers, both parties, under the provisions of the agreement, submitted to arbitration and Judge Gerald F. Flood was selected as arbitrator. On October 26, 1956 Judge Flood, as arbitrator, and, after hearing, awarded to the buyer $3,182.88.[1] Buyer’s motion to correct the arbitrator’s award was dismissed by the Code of common Pleas No. 6 of Philadelphia County and judgment was entered in the amount of $3,182.88 in conformity with the arbitrator’s award. From that judgment this appeal ensued. y1[@4TY]
.
g- HB'
'&$zgK9T?
4vNH"72P
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- e
[6F }."c
N^AlhR^
[1] The buyer’s claim is based largely on the proposition that sellers had warranted the company’s net worth. The amount allowed by the arbitrator $3,182.88 represented an error in computing state taxes, additional taxes and water rent. This amount is undisputed as a proper claim against the fund. BkY#wJ'
F{_,IQ]U
b5ul|p
s#8T46?
厦大法学院2000年硕士研究生入学考试民法试卷 F`,Hf Cb\
民法试卷(研2000) SR_-wD
K@Xj)
一、名词解释(4*5,20分) Hs{x Z:
-BWWaL
1、抗辩权 IRTWmT
jT
}:QoY Nq
2、宣告死亡 G:
`So
_>r(T4}]
3、过错 @\M^Zuo
PWquu`
4、复代理 ] mK{E~Zll
THB[(3q
5、专利权 a^ys7UV
1=ZQRJW0B
二、简答题(4*10,40分) 66$hdT$
?^LG>GgV
1、简述法人的成立条件 b!teSf
25r3[gX9`
2、简述相邻关系的种类和处理原则 .ud&$-[a
mS49l
3、简述民法对所有权的保护 z46Sh&+
*i!t&s
4、我国法定继承人的范围和顺序 oZdY0n h4
H6Gs&y