Re: [閒聊] 法律界語言為什麼不白話些?

看板WomenTalk作者LacrimosaMus (Dr.King Schultz)時間4月前 (2023/12/20 23:26)推噓6(6推 0噓 9→)

留言15則, 7人參與討論串2/2 (看更多)

小孩睡了，來閒聊一下。法律文書的撰寫，追求兩件事情：一、簡短精確且周全；二、容易閱讀。首先講簡短精確且周全，精確又可以分為兩個層面，第一層面，概念與字詞的一對一指涉，一個概念只用一個字詞來指涉，一個字詞只指涉一個概念。例如契約中提到「乙方車輛」，就應該只使用這兩個字詞來指涉這個概念，不該出現「乙方貨車」或「乙方運輸車輛」，除非「乙方貨車」或「乙方運輸車輛」是指「乙方車輛」的特定子集合。又例如我很反對使用「如」來描述契約的條件/if，因為「如」有「例如」和「如果」兩種字義，改用「若」的話就精確地多了。第二層面，精確地表現態度和語氣。例如，我的當事人小美和鄰居起衝突，拉扯間小美甩了鄰居一個巴掌被告傷害罪，開庭時法官已經表明本案小美不是正當防衛，可是小美又一直要我幫她用正當防衛辯護，怎麼辦呢？「鄰居和小美拉扯，本來就推來推去，小美這樣甩鄰居巴掌，是正當防衛」？白話文太冗，法官大概看到一半就不爽了，我不想開庭被罵。「被告正當防衛，不罰」？太肯定句了，法官都說不想審查正當防衛了，我這樣寫下次開庭一定被罵。不如狀末另起一段：「另如同歷次書狀所述，被告所為尚難逕認非無阻卻違法事由，祈請　鈞院明察」，法官看到就知道，OK律師這句是補充說明/廢話，下次開庭不用問，而且用詞婉轉=客氣，放他一馬開庭不罵他。只可惜在素人小美眼中，我多重否定、婉轉曲折的用心不過是難以閱讀而已。第二層面，容易閱讀。這還要視寫作的對象而定。對法官、檢察官和對造律師來說，因為大家求學+工作基本上都十年起跳，看習慣了，文白夾雜的公文書寫法加上大量法律用語（單一字詞指涉單一概念）反而更好閱讀，什麼意思一眼瞄過去大概就清楚了。反而像中國那邊的判決極度白話文傾向，讀起來說有多卡就有多卡，看到尾巴忘了頭，回去從頭看起又忘了尾巴寫什麼，不畫重點做筆記，一張A4十分鐘還看不完。至於如果是寫給客戶或非法律工作的主管，則是要盡可能淺白，但是「字詞、概念一對一指涉」的原則還是不可以放下，否則徒生爭議。最後是推文提到的，「法律用語對素人而言不易閱讀」可不只是台灣，國外也是如此。以下是英文契約的約因公版： NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that in consideration of the Title Company issuing its title insurance policy to Buyer effective as of the date closing occurs without making exception therein to matters which may arise between the last effective date of the title insurance commitment issued by the Title Company in connection with Buyer’s title insurance (the “Effective Date”) and the date the documents creating the interest being insured have been filed for record and which matters may constitute an encumbrance on or affect said title, Seller agrees to promptly defend, remove, bond or otherwise dispose of any encumbrance, lien or objectionable matter to title caused by the acts of Seller, its agents or representatives which may arise or to be filed, as the case may be, against the Real Property during the period of time between the Effective Date and the date of recording of all closing instruments, and to hold harmless, and indemnify the Title Company against all expenses, costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees, which may arise out of Seller’s failure to so remove, bond or otherwise dispose of any said liens, encumbrances or objectionable matters caused by the acts of Seller, its agents or representatives; provided, however, the Title Company shall use good faith and diligent efforts to cause all documents to be recorded as soon as possible but, in any event, no later than three (3) business days after the date hereof and Seller shall have no obligations or liability hereunder with respect to any objections to title which may arise or be filed after such three (3) business day. 這一段有在接觸外國契約的法律工作者應該都熟到會背了，但就算對英語母語人士來說，如果不是業內人士，要在第一時間閱讀理解仍非易事，原因無他，力求簡短、精確且周全下的必要之惡而已。 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 220.129.205.5 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/WomenTalk/M.1703085977.A.C63.html ※ 編輯: LacrimosaMus (220.129.205.5 臺灣), 12/20/2023 23:31:15

→

eva19452002

12/20 23:47, 4月前 , 1^F

12/20 23:47, 1^F

→

eva19452002

12/20 23:47, 4月前 , 2^F

12/20 23:47, 2^F

確實字數一樣多，但寫白話文和套既定成句還是有差別。我白話文那句，有帶到事實說明和理由論述，對法官來說變成要一字一句看，但是套既定成句，法官瞄一眼懂我意思就跳過去了。這也是我後面講容易閱讀的問題。既定成句大家工作看習慣了很快，工作上少出現的白話文反而要慢下來看到底寫了什麼。總結來說，冗長是取決於閱讀時間，而不是文字長短；對一般人來說容易閱讀的寫法，法律工作者反而要花更多時間看。 ※ 編輯: LacrimosaMus (220.129.205.5 臺灣), 12/21/2023 00:02:43

推

mopepe5566

12/21 00:30, 4月前 , 3^F

12/21 00:30, 3^F

→

mopepe5566

12/21 00:30, 4月前 , 4^F

12/21 00:30, 4^F

→

webster1112

12/21 02:18, 4月前 , 5^F

12/21 02:18, 5^F