Key Differences Between Common Law And Civil Law

Common law is formed on the basis that courts will make decisions based on past judgments (Letwin, 2011). Cases with similar circumstances will be ruled in the saw way. In most cases the common law will combine with statutory and constitutional law in order to make decisions. Common law bases on the fact that court cases will be primarily ruled on precedent (Aspen Publishers, 2010). The common law is crucial to understanding almost all important

Statutory interpretation is the legal process whereby a judge applies a statute to a case and must give meaning to the words in the statute in order to decide what they mean and how it should be applied to a particular case. When interpreting statutes, the judges’ role is to put into effect the Parliaments wishes. Conflicts may arise when deciding if the intention of Parliament can be found in the words of the statute itself or whether judges should acquire into the purpose of the Act then interpret the words themselves. In order to interpret these

Civil Law: about a party bringing an action for a personal remedy of some kind.

Under the Civil Law system, the laws are written and codified that the judges have to follow verbatium. Whereas, under the common law system that is followed by Australia, India and the United Kingdom, the laws are codified, doctrine of precedents is followed but the higher courts have the power to over-rule old judgements and existing law in cases where the law breaches the basic structure. (Peterson)

Historically, common law emphasized the importance of judicial decisions rather than utilizing the structure of codes, legal rules, and statutes as courts do today. In the past, judges documented and issued their decisions which were later circulated from one court to another and became known as common law. In cases where parties disagreed, common law court would look at previous decisions made in related cases and incorporate those decisions into the current case (Siegel, et al., 2011). If similar disputes had been resolved in the previous case, the court would utilize the same perspective to resolve their current case. This became known as precedent and like common law, continues to be utilized in today’s court system (Siegel, et al., 2011).

Common law is the system of laws, which originated and were developed in England, that are “based on court decisions, on the doctrines implicit in those decisions, and on customs and usages rather than on codified written laws” (Melvin, 2011). In other words, common law is law that is made by judges not by the legislature. It is law that is based on court precedent and it evolves over time. Statutory law, which is also referred to as statute law “is written law established by enactments

Modern day common law is adjudicated similarly with it being judged according to available statutes or acts enacted by legislative bodies and decisions made in previous cases after all evidence and facts are attained. The decisions of a court/judge are binding only in a particular jurisdiction (area of control or influence), and even within jurisdiction, some courts have more power than others. Due to this before a decision is made it must be accepted by higher courts (Statute and Common Law, 2014).

In comparing the difference between legislative, also known as statute law, to common law or case law, I felt that each serve an equally important role within our judicial system. The statutes are set by a legislative body, consequently, case law is determined by the judges that hear the cases (Hall, 2015). A statute is a basic definition of an act that is deemed to be unacceptable by society with a defined punishment for acts committed violating it. The adjudication of the offense could yield a different outcome as prescribed by the statute, in turn setting a precedent for future cases of the same offense.

Professor Compagnoni effectively outlined the characteristics of different legal systems in Class IV, and rereading her class slides was helpful in understanding the subtleties of legal system associated with my source text, French Civil Law, based on the Napoleonic code (code civil of 1804). I then related that to the legal system as it functions in Canada, making note of the most prominent differences, and being cognizant of those as I embarked upon my translation. N.B.: In my view, the term "legal system" refers to the nature and content of the law generally, and the structures and methods whereby it is legislated upon, adjudicated upon and administered, within a given jurisdiction. Common law and civil law legal traditions share similar social objectives (individualism, liberalism and personal rights), but they diverge in several key areas.

Statutory interpretation is process of interpreting statutes by the judges. The definition of statutes have had very specific words but indeed the judges would still need the statutory interpretation to help them. The reason of this, even how, the words in the statutes are specific but sometimes the words contains ambiguity and vagueness in words. On top of that, each word could give us different meaning. For example, we can find in the Oxford Dictionary where a word would contain at least one meaning. Hence, without the statutory interpretation, a lot of judges would have trouble in deciding their judgments in deciding a case. This essay will analyse the four rules, intrinsic aids and extrinsic aids and presumptions in the interpretation

The purpose of civil law is to “deal with the disputes between individuals, organizations, or between the two, in which compensation is awarded to the victim,” (“Civil Law vs Criminal Law.”, 2012). Civil law applies when there is a dispute between private parties, and the government is not involved. The lack of government involvement also leads to easier negotiations. Civil cases can be much more flexible since there is typically no law being broken and thus, no legal actions have to be taken. The less rigid civil law cases also generally allow them to be settled quickly and without controversy. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, more than half of general civil trials conclude in state courts, meaning they are able to reach an agreement and do not have to continue spending unnecessary time and money on the case (“Civil Justice.”, 2017).

A collection of rules authorised by a political body and enforced by those with authoritative power (Open Education Sociology Dictionary, 2017), law is a prevalent part of every society, no matter its size. In this essay I will explain the difference between sociological perspectives and common sense, offer a brief introduction into the two perspectives I have chosen to write about, and analyse and compare their views on the structure of law. Also, I intend to find out if the relevancy the perspectives held at the time of writing translates into today’s society.

Common law - that part of the English law not embodied in legislation. It consists of rules of law based on common custom and usage and on judicial court decisions. English common law became the basis of law in the USA and many other English-speaking countries.

Nowadays every legal system wants to achieve justice. Different legal traditions in the world have given a different meaning of this concept by following one of the two legal systems: a civil law system and a common law system. The civil law system emerged from Roman law and throughout many centuries has been developed in continental Europe and often is called a “continental legal system”, achieving its prominence through development of aqui communitare in Europe. The common law system emerged in England during the Anglo-Saxon period and was developed by British colonies, reaching its peak in the United Kingdom and the United States of America.

The judges in the lower courts are bound to follow previous decision of the higher courts. It is an essential component of the common law as it is important of adequate law reporting. It is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision-making.