The Differences Of The English 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

On the fourth of July in 1776 the United States became an independent nation. At that point in time, the foundation for a formal legal system was put into place. One of the oldest sources of law is the common law, which dates back to the colonial days. In the case of Davis v. Baugh, the common law rule was used in the first court trial. Common law refers back to precedent cases of similar disputes and assists the judge in making a decision after comparing both cases. Utilizing this ruling to resolve disputes in court is very helpful because it provides uniformity in court. This rule also provides an expectation of what the verdict will be based off the prior cases. Most importantly, common law allows the judge to remain neutral without the implication of personal bias on each case (Meiners, 2012, pp. 9-10).

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)

individual aspects of the case. Therefore, law sees things purely to benefit society; they lack the

Common law is law originating from use and custom rather than from written statutes. The term refers to non-statutory customs, traditions, and precedents that help guide judicial decision making (Schmalleger). The judge

6. On what basis are Charter fundamental rights and freedoms open to restriction by Parliament or the provincial legislatures? Answer: Fundamental rights and freedoms may be restricted under s. 1 if the restriction can be shown to "be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." Rights and freedoms may be "temporarily" overridden by the "notwithstanding" clause (s. 33) as well. 7. Why is the doctrine of stare decisis an important part of the Common Law system? Answer: The doctrine of stare decisis is the theory of precedent. Judges are expected to apply previous decisions to similar cases which come before them in order to maintain a degree of consistency in the law. By following this doctrine, the law is not only consistent, but others can predict how the law may be applied in similar. 8. How does the Common Law differ from the principles of equity? From statute law? Answer: Common Law and equity have different roots. The common law was the product of the common law courts. The principles of equity were originally principles or rules which the King applied in settling disputes which did not fall within the jurisdiction of the common law courts. Later, the King's Court (Chancery) used

There are two major areas of law, civil law and criminal law. As a society, people tend to not pay attention to law unless they are in the middle of an issue. The two areas of law are important to know though, since an issue can occur at any time and it is important to be prepared and have a basic understanding of what is happening and what to do. Many people do not know the distinction between civil law and criminal law, and while the ramifications vary considerably for each, the cases can occur simultaneously, which is why it is important to know the differences and in what scenarios each form is used.

Due to the different roots of the two systems, the definition of a contract, as well as its formation, differ between contract law in Common Law Jurisdictions and in Civil Law Jurisdictions (France). The Common Law views contracts as bargains, exchange, a simple agreement has no binding force. It is mainly concerned with forecasting the impact and the binding legal consequences of a party’s promise. The structure or purpose of the contract is not as important as knowing whether the promise of performance that the contract is based upon is enforceable.

The doctrine of Judicial precedent applies the principles of stare decisis which ‘lets the decision stand’. ‘Whenever a new problem arises in law the final decision forms a rule to be followed in all similar cases, making the law more predictable’ making it easier for people to live within the law.

Time-saving. Where principles have been established, cases with familiar facts are unlikely to go through a lengthy process of litigation. The main disadvantages of the doctrine of judicial precedent are; -

The lower courts are bound by the House of Lords so they have to apply

The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis which means ‘to stand by what has been decided’. It is a common law principle whereby judges are bound to follow previous decisions in cases where the material facts are sufficiently similar and the earlier decision was made in a court above the current one in the court hierarchy. This doctrine of precedent is extremely strong in English law as it ensures fairness and consistency and it highlights the importance of case law in our legal system. Black's Law Dictionary defines "precedent" as a "rule of law established for the first time by a court for a particular type of case and thereafter referred to in deciding similar cases."

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.

The advantages are certainty, practicality and flexibility. Certainty is one of the greatest advantages of the doctrine. The people can aim their actions with faith with the results in greater certainty. For the practicality, the law evolved was ground on reality instead of theoretical conditions. With there is still an adaptability that the judges can prevent from following previous cases if it had been settled incaution or by distinguishing precedents while the higher courts restrict the lower courts with its decision. The first disadvantages of doctrine of binding judicial precedent is rigidity. A lower courts must follow a prior precedent even it is wrong and also the cases may not go on for appeal to a higher court. The chances of amending the previous result may be lost and the judges must give a good reason for denying the previous precedents. The other disadvantages is hard to determine the ratio decidendi as there may be more than one ratio decidendi. So, this makes the judges very difficult to discover the right ratio decidendi. In the cases Rickards v Lothian (1913), the judges give more than one ratio decidendi. There is hundreds of judgement are made every year. The massive and rising of number in cases become a main problem with the doctrine and the complexity of the law. This let the important authority unintentionally be