國際經濟法習題集

⑴ 國際經濟法1多選

1.ABCD
2.BC
3.ABCD
4.ABC
5.BD
6.ABC
7.ABD
8.ABCD
9.BC

⑵ 國際經濟法的一道案例題

（1）有理，應支付。（2）可以，只要有明確的受約束的意思表示即可。
「天不想亮」你懂不懂啊？這是英國法判例上大名鼎鼎的薰劑案！
Carlill Vs. Carbolic smoke ball
The Full decision of the case
APPEAL from a decision of Hawkins, J.(2)

The defendants, who were the proprietors and vendors of a medical preparation called "The Carbolic Smoke Ball," inserted in the Pall Mall Gazette of November 13, 1891, and in other newspapers, the following advertisement: "100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to any person who contracts the increasing epidemic influenza, colds, or any disease caused by taking cold, after having used the ball three times daily for two weeks according to the printed directions supplied with each ball. 1000 is deposited with the Alliance Bank, Regent Street, shewing our sincerity in the matter.

"During the last epidemic of influenza many thousand carbolic smoke balls were sold as preventives against this disease, and in no ascertained case was the disease contracted by those using the carbolic smoke ball.

"One carbolic smoke ball will last a family several months, making it the cheapest remedy in the world at the price, 10, post free. The ball can be refilled at a cost of 5 Address, Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, 27, Princes Street, Hanover Square, London."

The plaintiff, a lady, on the faith of this advertisement, bought one of the balls at a chemist』s, and used it as directed, three times a day, from November 20, 1891, to January 17, 1892, when she was attacked by influenza. Hawkins, J., held that she was entitled to recover the 100 The defendants appealed.

Finlay, Q.C., and T. Terrell, for the defendants. The facts shew that there was no binding contract between the parties. The case is not like Williams v. Carwardine (4 B. Ad. 621), where the money was to become payable on the performance of certain acts by the plaintiff; here the plaintiff could not by any act of her own establish a claim, for, to establish her right to the money, it was necessary that she should be attacked by influenza - an event over which she had no control. The words express an intention, but do not amount to a promise: Week v. Tibold. 1 Roll. Abr. 6 (M.). The present case is similar to Harris v. Nickerson. Law Rep. 8 Q. B. 286. The advertisement is too vague to be the basis of a contract; there is no limit as to time, and no means of checking the use of the ball. Anyone who had influenza might come forward and depose that he had used the ball for a fortnight, and it would be impossible to disprove it. Guthing v. Lynn 2 B. Ad. 232 supports the view that the terms are too vague to make a contract, there being no limit as to time, a person might claim who took the influenza ten years after using the remedy. There is no consideration moving from the plaintiff: Gerhard v. Bates 2 E. B. 476. The present case differs from Denton v. Great Northern Ry. Co. 5 E. B. 860, for there an overt act was done by the plaintiff on the faith of a statement by the defendants. In order to make a contract by fulfilment of a condition, there must either be a communication of intention to accept the offer, or there must be the performance of some overt act. The mere doing an act in private will not be enough. This principle was laid down by Lord Blackburn in Brogden v. Metropolitan Ry. Co. 2 App. Cas. 666. The terms of the advertisement would enable a person who stole the balls to claim the reward, though his using them was no possible benefit to the defendants. At all events, the advertisement should be held to apply only to persons who bought directly from the defendants. But, if there be a contract at all, it is a wagering contract, as being one where the liability depends on an event beyond the control of the parties, and which is therefore void under 8 9 Vict. c. 109. Or, if not, it is bad under 14 Geo. 3, c. 48, s. 2, as being a policy of insurance on the happening of an uncertain event, and not conforming with the provisions of that section.

Dickens, Q.C., and W. B. Allen, for the plaintiff. [THE COURT intimated that they required no argument as to the question whether the contract was a wager or a policy of insurance.] The advertisement clearly was an offer by the defendants; it was published that it might be read and acted on, and they cannot be heard to say that it was an empty boast, which they were under no obligation to fulfil. The offer was ly accepted. An advertisement was addressed to all the public - as soon as a person does the act mentioned, there is a contract with him. It is said that there must be a communication of the acceptance; but the language of Lord Blackburn, in Brogden v. Metropolitan Ry. Co. 2 App. Cas. 666, shews that merely doing the acts indicated is an acceptance of the proposal. It never was intended that a person proposing to use the smoke ball should go to the office and obtain a repetition of the statements in the advertisement. The defendants are endeavouring to introce words into the advertisement to the effect that the use of the preparation must be with their privity or under their superintendence. Where an offer is made to all the world, nothing can be imported beyond the fulfilment of the conditions. Notice before the event cannot be required; the advertisement is an offer made to any person who fulfils the condition, as is explained in Spencer v. Harding Law Rep. 5 C. P. 561. Williams v. Carwardine 4 B. Ad. 621 shews strongly that notice to the person making the offer is not necessary. The promise is to the person who does an act, not to the person who says he is going to do it and then does it. As to notice after the event, it could have no effect, and the present case is within the language of Lord Blackburn in Brogden v. Metropolitan Ry. Co. 2 App. Cas. 666. It is urged that the terms are too vague and uncertain to make a contract; but, as regards parties, there is no more uncertainty than in all other cases of this description. It is said, too, that the promise might apply to a person who stole any one of the balls. But it is clear that only a person who lawfully acquired the preparation could claim the benefit of the advertisement. It is also urged that the terms should be held to apply only to persons who bought directly from the defendants; but that is not the import of the words, and there is no reason for implying such a limitation, an increased sale being a benefit to the defendants, though effected through a middleman, and the use of the balls must be presumed to serve as an advertisement and increase the sale. As to the want of restriction as to time, there are several possible constructions of the terms; they may mean that, after you have used it for a fortnight, you will be safe so long as you go on using it, or that you will be safe ring the prevalence of the epidemic. Or the true view may be that a fortnight』s use will make a person safe for a reasonable time.

Then as to the consideration. In Gerhard v. Bates 2 E. B. 476, Lord Campbell never meant to say that if there was a direct invitation to take shares, and shares were taken on the faith of it, there was no consideration. The decision went on the form of the declaration, which did not state that the contract extended to future holders. The decision that there was no consideration was qualified by the words "as between these parties," the plaintiff not having alleged himself to be a member of the class to whom the promise was made.

Finlay, Q.C., in reply. There is no binding contract. The money is payable on a person』s taking influenza after having used the ball for a fortnight, and the language would apply just as well to a person who had used it for a fortnight before the advertisement as to a person who used it on the faith of the advertisement. The advertisement is merely an expression of intention to pay 100 to a person who fulfils two conditions; but it is not a request to do anything, and there is no more consideration in using the ball than in contracting the influenza. That a contract should be completed by a private act is against the language of Lord Blackburn in Brogden v. Metropolitan Ry. Co. 2 App. Cas. 692. The use of the ball at home stands on the same level as the writing a letter which is kept in the writer』s drawer. In Denton v. Great Northern Ry. Co. 5 E. B. 860 the fact was ascertained by a public, not a secret act. The respondent relies on Williams v. Carwardine 4 B. Ad. 621, and the other cases of that class; but there a service was done to the advertiser. Here no service to the defendants was requested, for it was no benefit to them that the balls should be used: their interest was only that they should be sold. Those cases also differ from the present in this important particular, that in them the service was one which could only be performed by a limited number of persons, so there was no difficulty in ascertaining with whom the contract was made. It is said the advertisement was not a legal contract, but a promise in honour, which, if the defendants had been approached in a proper way, they would have fulfilled. A request is as necessary in the case of an executed consideration as of an executory one:

Lampleigh v. Braithwait 1 Sm. L. C. 9th ed. pp. 153, 157, 159; and here there was no request. Then as to the want of limitation as to time, it is conceded that the defendants cannot have meant to contract without some limit, and three limitations have been suggested. The limitation "ring the prevalence of the epidemic" is inadmissible, for the advertisement applies to colds as well as influenza. The limitation "ring use" is excluded by the language "after having used." The third is, "within a reasonable time," and that is probably what was intended; but it cannot be deced from the words; so the fair result is that there was no legal contract at all.

看不懂？我給你大致講一下。法官是這么說的，雖然說廣告是對不特定人提出的，一般情況下屬於要約邀請（ITT），但是本案中，被告不僅將懸賞內容寫得十分具體，而且已經把1000英鎊存進銀行，充分顯示出它願意受到該廣告內容的約束（to be bound）,所以符合了要約的根本特徵，即受約束的意思表示。所以，本案中的廣告是一個要約。而原告通過購買並使用薰劑的行為作出了行為承諾。有要約，有承諾，這個合同就成立了。
英美法教材用這個案例來說明，要約不一定要向特定人發出，只要有明確的受約束的意思表示即可。
打字不易，如滿意，望採納。

⑶ 國際經濟法 試題

1、b d
4、c d
5、b c
12、c
13、d
14、d

⑷ 國際經濟法習題

有正當的理由，因為你在每次發盤時都是在訂立一個新的有效合同，舊的發盤隨即終止，而對方還盤是在你的有效期之內，合同在你收到還盤時成立。

第二題就不知道了！~~

⑸ 國際經濟法例分析題

國際經濟法是指調整國家之間；國際組織之間；國家與國際組織之間；國家與內他國私人之間；國際組織容與私人之間以及不同國籍私人之間，相互經濟關系的法律規范的總稱。它是隨著各國之間貿易和經濟往來日益增長以及國家對貿易和經濟活動的干預日益加強而形成和發展的。早在中世紀末期，歐洲主要商業城市就有一些關於國際商業交易的規則。第二次世界大戰後，有關國際經濟關系的法律規則和制度大量出現，並具有了國家之間條約的形式。作為一門學科，國際經濟法學也於第二次世界大戰後，逐漸發展起來。國際經濟法調整的是廣義的國際經濟關系，那麼它必然既包括國際法規范，也包括國內法規范；既包括公法，也包括私法。在經濟全球化加快的背景下，國際經濟關系、國際經濟秩序和國際經濟法的發展和更改，是在南北矛盾—交鋒—磋商—妥協—合作—協調—新的矛盾中曲折行進的。如何擴大和加強眾多發展中國家對世界經濟事務的發言權、參與權和決策權，把有關的「國際游戲規則」或行為規范制定得更加公平合理，從而更能促進建立起公平、公正、合理的國際經濟新秩序。面臨這一客觀需求，國際經濟法正在發生新的變化。

⑹ 國際經濟法的簡答題，急求

海上保險法有四大原則,即保險利益原則、最大誠信原則、因果關系原則以及代位求償原則。
1， 簡述不適用1980年聯合國國際貨物銷售合同公約的買賣。
答：（1）購進供私人、家人或家庭使用的貨物的銷售。（2）通過拍賣的方式簽訂的國際貨物買賣合同。（3）根據法律、執行令狀或其它令狀的銷售。（4）公債、股票、投資證券、流通票據或貨幣的銷售。（5）船舶、飛機或氣墊船的銷售。（6）電力的買賣。

⑺ 求 法律 國際經濟法 答案

答案：
一．多項選擇題
1.答案：A、B、C
【精講解析】國際經濟法是調整國際經濟關系的法律規范的總稱。國際經濟法的調整范圍是：(1)國際貨物貿易的法律規范與制度 (2)國際服務貿易的法律規范和法律制度(3)國際投資的法律規范與制度(4)有關知識產權國際保護的法律規范與制度(5)有關國際貨幣與金融的法律規范與制度(6)有關國際稅收的法律規范與制度(7)國際經濟組織的法律規范與制度，國際經濟法不調整國際間的民事法律關系。故D是不對的，應當選擇A、B、C。

2.答案：A、B
【精講解析】國際經濟法與國際公法具有以下區別：(1)在主體上——國際經濟法的主體包括自然人、法人、國家和國際經濟組織。而國際公法的主體主要為國家和國際組織。(2)在法律淵源上——國際經濟法的淵源包括國際經濟條約、國際商業慣例、聯合國大會的決議和國內立法等。而國際公法的淵源主要是國際條約和國際習慣。國際商業慣例不是國際公法的淵源。(3)在調整對象上——國際經濟法調整不同國家的自然人、法人、國家和國際經濟組織之間的經濟關系，而不是政治關系。而國際公法主要調整國家間的政治、外交和軍事等非經濟關系。此外，國際公法的基本原則除國家主權原則之外，還包括平等互利原則等。所以A、B是正確的。

3.答案：A、B、C、D
【精講解析】國際經濟法的淵源包括：(1)國際經濟條約。 (2)國際商業慣例。
(3)聯合國大會的規范性決議。(4)國內立法。此外，國內判例在普通法國家是重要的國際經濟法的國內法淵源，但判例在我國不屬於法律的淵源。故A、B、C、D都是正確的。

4.答案：B、D
【精講解析】國際商業慣例是在國際經濟交往中經過反復實踐形成的不成文的行為規范。該規范屬於任意性的規范，對當事人沒有強制性的作用，只有在當事人選擇適用時，才約束當事人。並且當事人在選擇其適用時，可以根據交易的需要對其進行修改或者刪除。故B、D是國際商業慣例的特點。

⑻ 2010年4月國際經濟法概論的試題及答案

全國2010年4月高等教育自學考試
國際經濟法概論試題
一、單項選擇題(本大題共20小題，每小題1分，共20分)
在每小題列出的四個備選項中只有一個是符合題目要求的，請將其代碼填寫在題後的括弧內。錯選、多選或未選均無分。
1.構成南北合作實踐、替代《洛美協定》的協定是（ ）
A.《服務貿易總協定》 B.《關稅與貿易總協定》
C.《科托努協定》 D.《七十七國集團協定》
2.有約必守原則不是絕對的，其中一項限制條件是（ ）
A.意思自治 B.違約賠償
C.誠實信用 D.情勢變遷
3.下列關於國際貨物買賣合同的發價(要約)和接受(承諾)的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.緘默構成接受 B.向廣大公眾散發商品目錄構成發價
C.向公眾提出訂立合同建議構成發價 D.根據投郵主義，接受後不可撤回
4.下列關於《2000年國際貿易術語解釋通則》的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.《通則》涉及違約的後果
B.《通則》涉及免責事項
C.《通則》適用於無形貨物的買賣
D.《通則》適用於買賣合同當事人的權利義務
5.下列有關「CIF上海」的表述，正確的是（ ）
A。目的港是上海 B.賣方在上海交貨
C.海上運輸途中的風險由賣方承擔 D.買方支付保險費
6.下列有關托收的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.托收是一種銀行信用
B.托收行承擔付款責任
C.托收行與付款人之間是代理關系
D.對付款人來說，承兌交單比付款交單較為有利
7.建立世界貿易組織的關稅與貿易總協定多邊貿易談判是（ ）
A.肯尼迪回合談判 B.多哈回合談判
C.烏拉圭回合談判 D.東京回合談判
8.下列中國對外開放服務貿易的承諾中，屬於水平承諾的是（ ）
A.商業服務承諾 B.以合資企業的形式提供服務
C.健康與社會服務承諾 D.關稅減讓承諾
9.下列關於國際技術貿易中「技術」的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.技術是一種抽象的思維 B.技術具有有體性特點
C.技術是系統的知識 D.作為貿易對象的技術通常是公有技術
10.旨在促進國際投資跨國流動的世界性組織是（ ）
A.IMF B.WIPO
C.NAFTA D.MIGA
11.多邊投資擔保機構在作出每一項承保決定之前，必須對以下哪個國家的投資環境進行審查（ ）
A.投資者母國 B.東道國
C.承保人本國 D.該機構總裁國籍國
12.第二次世界大戰後期建立的國際貨幣法律制度稱為（ ）
A.牙買加體系 B.巴塞爾體制
C.布雷頓森林體制 D.華沙體系
13.《國際貨幣基金協定》第8條規定的一般義務是指（ ）
A.固定匯率 B.取消經常項目的外匯管制
C.取消資本項目的外匯管制 D.使用特別提款權作為儲備資產
14.無追索權項目貸款的還款來源是（ ）
A.項目主辦者的款項 B.項目本身產生的收益
C.項目主辦者的母公司 D.項目公司的注冊資本
15.下列各項中屬於國際證券發行審核制度的是（ ）
A.單一制 B.復合制
C.注冊制 D.普惠制
16.下列關於稅收管轄權的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.在納稅人居民身份認定方面形成了統一的國際標准
B.中國在法人的居民身份認定方面採取實際管理機構所在地標准
C.中國在自然人的稅收居民身份認定方面只採取住所標准
D.目前大多數國家行使公民稅收管轄權
17.甲國與乙國已經締結避免雙重征稅協定，但甲國與丙國尚未締結避免雙重征稅協定，丙國一企業為獲得稅收優惠待遇在乙國設立一家子公司，這種做法叫作（ ）
A.資本弱化 B.套用稅收協定
C.納稅主體的跨國移動 D.納稅對象的跨國移動
18.以下關於歐盟的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.歐盟是根據1991年《馬斯特里赫特條約》成立的
B.歐盟理事會是歐盟的執行機構
C.歐洲議會議員目前由各成員國政府選派代表組成
D.歐共體法院的判決對於成員國沒有法律約束力
19.依中國《仲裁法》，下列關於仲裁的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.仲裁機構不擁有法定管轄權 B.仲裁裁決可以上訴
C.在仲裁程序中不能進行調解 D.為確保公正，仲裁裁決應當公開
20.CIETAC是下列哪個爭端解決機構的英文縮略語（ ）
A.中國海事仲裁委員會 B.中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會
C.中國香港國際仲裁中心 D.瑞典斯德哥爾摩商會仲裁院

二、多項選擇題(本大題共10小題，每小題2分，共20分)
在每小題列出的五個備選項中至少有兩個是符合題目要求的，請將其代碼填寫在題後的括弧內。錯選、多選、少選或未選均無分。
21.根據《聯合國國際貨物銷售合同公約》，買方違約，賣方可以採取的補救方法是（ ）
A.減價 B.要求交付替代物
C.要求損害賠償 D.宣告合同無效
E.要求履行義務
22.根據《聯合國國際貨物銷售合同公約》，下列關於風險轉移的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.在貨物特定化之前，風險就可以轉移
B.風險轉移的含義是風險造成損失的承擔的轉移
C.誰承擔風險，誰就承擔風險造成的貨物損失
D.風險轉移到買方承擔後，貨物損壞，買方可以無條件解除付款義務
E.賣方根本違約，但風險已轉移給買方，買方即不能宣告合同無效
23.下列有關信用證開證行的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.開證行負首要付款責任 B.開證行對受益人有付款義務
C.開證行付款時須獲得開證申請人的同意 D.開證行付款時遵循嚴格相符原則
E.開證行是出具匯票的銀行
24.世界貿易組織《服務貿易總協定》承諾表的內容包括（ ）
A.部門或分部門 B.服務提供方式
C.市場准入 D.國民待遇
E.附加承諾
25.我國作為世界貿易組織成員方，根據《國際服務貿易分類表》承諾開放的部門是（ ）
A.教育服務 B.娛樂、文化與體育服務
C.銷售服務 D.健康與社會服務
E.環境服務
26.根據我國《技術進出口管理條例》，國際技術貿易合同可以分為（ ）
A.技術服務合同 B.專利權轉讓合同
C.專利實施許可合同 D.專利申請權轉讓合同
E.技術秘密轉讓合同
27.國際投資法領域中的「赫爾原則」是指徵收補償應當（ ）
A.充分 B.適當
C.及時 D.合理
E.有效
28.以下普遍被認為屬於避稅港的是（ ）
A.瑞士 B.澳門
C.香港 D.巴哈馬
E.哥斯大黎加
29.下列關於中國與GATT／WTO關系的表述，正確的是（ ）
A.中國是GATT的創始締約方 B.中國是WTO的創始成員方
C.中國於2001年加入WTO D.中國堅持以發展中國家的身份加入WTO
E.中國堅持權利義務平衡原則
30.根據中國《仲裁法》，下列表述正確的是（ ）
A.仲裁庭可由三名仲裁員或一名仲裁員組成
B.仲裁應開庭進行，但當事人可以協議不開庭
C.仲裁庭可以自行收集證據
D.仲裁庭可以採取財產保全措施
E.裁決書不附具裁決理由；當事人要求寫明的，應當寫明

三、簡答題(本大題共3小題，每小題5分，共15分)
31.簡述信用證欺詐例外原則及欺詐構成要件。
32.簡述《服務貿易總協定》之《關於金融服務的附件》中有關金融服務的「審慎例外」條款的內容。
33.簡述貸款人為保證所設浮動抵押權的優先地位通常所採取的保障措施。

四、論述題（本大題共2小題，每小題15分，共30分）
34.論國際貨物貿易管制的目的、特徵及主要國內法律措施。
35.論國際稅法中的稅收管轄權。

五、案例分析題(本題15分)
36.中益達公司是一家中國外貿公司，美麗美是一家美國外貿公司。兩公司於2008年7月簽訂了傢俱買賣合同，CIF天津，裝貨港為舊金山，2008年10月交貨，8月底前買方經由開證行開出以賣方為受益人的信用證，信用證有效期至2008年11月30日。開證行及時開出了信用證。賣方在交貨日期到來前，聽說買方因受金融危機影響而出現財務困難，便以預期違約為由拒絕履行合同。買方對賣方提起訴訟。
問題：設該合同適用《聯合國國際貨物銷售合同公約》。
(1)賣方在什麼地點將貨物交到哪裡?
(2)本案中，賣方可否以買方預期違約為由拒絕履行合同?為什麼?
(3)開證行向賣方付款的條件是什麼?
參考答案
國際經濟法概論：1C 2D 3D 4D 5A 6C 7C 8B 9C 10D
多選 21CDE 22BC 23CD 24ABCD 25ACE 26ABCD 27ABCD 28ADE 29ABCE 30ACDE
31．所謂「欺詐例外」, 是指在肯定獨立抽象性原則的前提下，允許銀行在存在欺詐的情況下，不予付款或承兌匯票，法院亦可頒發禁止支付令對銀行的付款或承兌予以禁止。
欺詐例外之「欺詐」的構成要件如下：①欺詐一般應是受害人的行為；②欺詐應達到實質性的程度；③欺詐必須是有充分證據證明已實際發生的行為。
32該附件特別指出，一成員基於審慎原因，可為保護投資者、存款者、保單持有人或金融服務提供者對其負有信託責任的人，或為保證金融體系的完整和穩定而採取與GATS條款不符的措施，此即「審慎例外」條款。
國際經濟法概論
33 在國際融資實踐中，為了保證所設浮動抵押權的優先地位，貸款人通常採取的保障措施有二 一是在浮動抵押協議中明確規定，借款人不得再在抵押財產上設定等同於或優先於貸款人浮動抵押權的其他擔保權利，並就該浮動抵押協議辦理登記手續，使得這一限制性條款具有對抗第三人的效力，二 是先在借款人擔保價值較高的財產上設定一般擔保物權。
34各國對其國際貨物貿易進行管制主要出於以下目的：①保護和促進國內生產，提高就業，調整產業結構；2.穩定匯率，維持國際收支平衡； 3.保障和促進對外貿易發展； 4.為實現某種政治或外交上的目的服務。
特徵：1.它是一國對外貿易政策的法律化，體現了國家對進出口貿易的干預；2.它主要是通過國家制定和執行國內立法、締結和執行國際條約的形式來進行。3.它在內容上主要體現為鼓勵出口、限制進口和改善本國的貿易條件。
國內法律措施：主要分為關稅措施和非關稅措施兩大類。（一）關稅措施 關稅是指一國海關根據該國法律規定，對通過其關境的進出口貨物課征的一種稅收。關稅措施是一種古老而當令仍然使用非常普遍的一種對外貿易管理措施。（二）非關稅措施 非關稅措施是指除關稅措施以外的其他一切直接或間接限制外國商品進口的法律上或行政上措施的總稱。
35稅收管轄權指一國政府進行征稅的權力，是國家主權在稅收領域內的體現。 在所得稅和一般財產稅上各國基於主權的屬人效力所主張的稅收管轄權表現為居民稅收管轄權和公民稅收管轄權，而基於主權的屬地效力所主張的稅收管轄權為所得來源地稅收管轄權和財產所在地管轄權。
案列分析
1 賣方在舊金山將貨物越過船舷時即完成交貨
2不能 ，因為 買方開出了以賣方為名義的信用證所以賣方無條件履行合同
3開證行付款的條件是具有以下兩樣 A買方開出的以賣方為受益人的信用證，B 兩公司買賣合同的單據