1. What is/are the legal issue(s) in this case? 

三、中翻英: 國家,作為擁有國際法人格者,應具備有四項要素:即人民、领土、政治組織與主權。首先,人民是共同生活於一個社會中,男女個人之集合體。而領土則是國家賴以發展、生存與行使主權之空間與地域。再者,政府組織為實現國家目的之管理機構,對內行使行政立法等權限,對外與他國締結條約或參加國际組織。主權則為國家行使內外關係等事務之最高的、排他性的權力。

四 ㆍCase Brief (＊本题请以英文作答Please answer in Englsh＊)

2. What is the ICI's holding? 

3. Please summarize the arguments of the United States 

3. “Countries dealing with the economic and public health-related impacts of COVID-19 have adopted a markedly nationalist approach to their response. More than 80 governments have placed restrictions of some sort on the export of personal protective equipment and medication necessary to treat those affected by the virus. Bans or explicit limits on the quantity of a good which may be exported or imported are Quantitative Restrictions, covered directly by Art XI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). As a general rule, Art XI disallows such measures, directly affecting the legality of the export bans and limits introduced in response to COVID-19. This rule, however, is subject to exceptions contained in four provisions of the GATT itself – Art. XI:2, Art. XII, Art. XX and Art. XXI.”

2. “The issue of same-sex equality has deeply polarised society. Taiwan’s constitutional court made a landmark ruling in 2017 to legalise gay marriage and ruled its decision should be implemented within two years. Conservative and religious groups mobilised to oppose amending the civil code and won a series of referendums last November in which voters rejected defining marriage as anything other than a union between a man and a woman. Same-sex couples could currently only adopt their partners’ biological children and could only marry foreigners from countries where gay marriage is also recognised.”

二、英翻中 (每題 20 分，60%) 1. “The insanity defense sits at the juncture of medical views of mental illness and moral and legal theories of criminal culpability—two areas of conflict and change. Small wonder that no particular test of insanity has developed into a constitutional baseline. And it is not for the courts to insist on any single criterion moving forward. Defining the precise relationship between criminal culpability and mental illness requires balancing complex considerations, among them the workings of the brain, the purposes of criminal law, and the ideas of free will and responsibility. This balance should remain open to revision as new medical knowledge emerges and societal norms evolve.”

8. Forum non conveniens

7. Fiduciary Duty

6. Statute of Frauds

110年 - 110東吳大學_碩士班招生考試_法律學系︰法學英文#100031

109年 - 109 東吳大學_博士班招生考試_法律學系︰法學英文#108283

109年 - 109東吳大學_碩士班招生考試_法律學系F組(財稅法)︰法學英文#100470

105年 - 北大法律碩士︰法學英文#99153