找回密码
 FreeOZ用户注册
查看: 4583|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[language study] 请问我写的这memo有错误的语法吗?英语不好,请各位大大多多指教...

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
1#
发表于 28-3-2016 18:16:18 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式

马上注册,结交更多好友,享用更多功能,让你轻松玩转社区。

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?FreeOZ用户注册

x
memo的开头部分:

We are going to hold a meeting regarding the “Law of Tort” and “Negligent Misstatement”.

The Law of Tort is a civil wrong which is focused on individual misconduct that leads to individual loss or injury. In contrast, negligent misstatement must be proven on the balance of probabilities.

A relevant case of Negligent Misstatement is Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corporation (1987) in which initially the auditors were found to be negligent, yet they are not negligent due to a recession which broke the chain of causation.

以下这段要附上一个跟negligent misstatement 有关系的新闻:
Refer to one legal action in an Australian Court that has been reported in the newspaper. Attached herewith a printed copy for your perusal.

Lastly, in accordance with compliance requirements, staff could check the website given below regularly for the sake of keep yourself updated with changes to the laws regulating negligent misstatement and small business.

Please follow the link below:
http://www.treasury.gov.au/Polic ... bility/Misstatement

Should you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at ext 121.


Kind regards

xxxxx

评分

参与人数 1威望 +1 收起 理由
leonjelena + 1 Q/微信2542395223办毕业证成绩单、学位认证

查看全部评分

回复  

使用道具 举报

2#
发表于 23-4-2016 00:14:32 | 只看该作者
微/q,2542395223学力认证丨毕业材料丨成绩材料咨询办里-诚招当地大学生代理
回复  

使用道具 举报

3#
发表于 23-4-2016 20:09:10 | 只看该作者
倒不是说语法的问题,概念有点乱啊

This is a meeting regarding torts and Negligent Misstatement.

A tort is a civil wrong in common law jurisdiction which causes someone else's loss or injuries.

[In contrast, negligent misstatement must be proven on the balance of probabilities. ] - 这里不对啊,torts 也是要prove on the balance of probabilities. 而且negligent misstatement 的定义也没有出来。

A relevant case of Negligent Misstatement is Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corporation (1987) in which initially the auditors were found to be negligent, yet they are not negligent due to a recession which broke the chain of causation.  - 这里也不对。initially found to be negligent, 是lower court finding 么?然后higher court 推翻了?如果是不同的court要说清楚。可以说 in which the auditors were found to be negligent in the court of xxx. But the High Court overturned the previous decision and found the auditors to be not negligent on the basis that the chain of causation was broken by the recession.

以下这段要附上一个跟negligent misstatement 有关系的新闻:
Refer to one legal action in an Australian Court that has been reported in the newspaper. Attached herewith a printed copy for your perusal.  - 这个直接说refer to an Australian case on this issue. Attached is a printed copy for your review.

Lastly, in accordance with the compliance requirements, staff should regularly check the website below to keep updated with the legislation regulating negligent misstatement and small business.

Please follow the link below:
http://www.treasury.gov.au/Polic ... bility/Misstatement

Should you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at ext 121.


Kind regards

xxxxx
回复  

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | FreeOZ用户注册

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|FreeOZ论坛

GMT+11, 3-1-2025 13:35 , Processed in 0.030580 second(s), 20 queries , Gzip On, Redis On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表