Difference Between English Civil Law And Common Law

1491 Words6 Pages
English Common Law
English Common Law and Civil Law are very much a different way that countries apply the law. One of the main differences being that the Common law is largely based on precedent which means that that the decision that a judge needs to make was most likely already made in the similar case. Because Common law uses case law as their reference for future cases, judges have a huge role in making the Common Law to what it is today and what it will be like in the future. Precedents are kept up to date through the years and are historically documented in collections of case law. The verdict in cases that follow the common law is decided by the jury which is a group of normal people that have no legal background that listens to
…show more content…
If the there are no significant facts that are completely different the judge would be forced to use the precedent set by earlier case.
To show how distinguishing works there are two cases that are commonly used. These common cases are Merritt v Merritt (1970) and Balfour v Balfour (1919) . In both of the cases, the defendant is the husband and the prosecutor is the wife and both claims are for a breach of contract.
In Balfour v Balfour the husband went away from the country to, but the wife was not able to go with him. The husband orally agreed to send money to the wife while he was away working. When the relationship ended so did the payments from the husband. The wife went to court to get the contract enforced in court, but he claims failed because it was decided that there was no intention to create legal relations. The agreement was looked as a domestic arrangement made between husband and wife and not a legal one.
In Merritt v Merritt the court was able to distinguish that there was a defence in the marital status of the people compared to the Balfour v Balfour case. It was aggreged that the husband would give money to the wife for her to pay the mortgage and when it fully paid off the house would be changed to only have the wife’s name and no longer joint ownership. The claim succeeded, even though this agreement was written down and signed by both parties, the husband rejected to
Get Access