2.2 Common law and civil law
In this part we are considering two major legal systems, common law and civil law; the first one is neither written or codified it is mainly based on the decisions already made by judges on previous similar cases, it is the system applied by the U.S and the U.K, where a judge makes a decision about a certain case with the help of a jury composed of normal, responsible, and sane group of people from the community. The second system is known as the civil law which is the exact opposite of the common law, it is based on written statutes, countries that use this system base their decisions on a case based on facts and investigations, actually they use codes named Legal codes, those codes determine “all matters
…show more content…
Also we notice that common law which is a system based on “precedents” i.e. decisions based on previous similar cases, it means that justice has already dealt with a resembling case, it is like having a blueprint for the judge to use, there is no need for codes and rules to solve and make a judgment about a certain case. Finally, as opposed to the civil law system, a case takes much less time to be solved in the common law system; the judge already has a blueprint about previous cases which makes the process easier for the judge. On the other hand, common law system has many disadvantages; for example, if a bad or unfair decision had been made on a previous case, and the court faces the same case again, the judge will make his decision based on a bad judgment. Furthermore, the absence of a precedent will make the judge’s duty more complicated; he/she will have no blueprint that he/she can use in the process of making the decision. Finally, we must stress the fact that indeed common law is seen as a source of difficulty, specially for law students, they have a hard time dealing with the common law system, especially when they’re living in a civil law country, common law is a non-codified system, it is …show more content…
Research on ESP:
3.1. Legal English research Northcott (2013) argues in his chapter concerning legal English that “Research in ESP generally has contributed substantially to the development of both the understanding and practice of legal English.” In fact to understand legal texts we need much more tools and experience which is not the case with other disciplines in the ESP. A legal text or document can be challenging and hard to analyze due to a number of factors such as the structure and form of the text, the type of vocabulary used, and also the style of the language used. A good example of the tools lawyers use when communicating via legal words, legal phrases, but also the use of Latin; here are some examples according to http://www.lawassist.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au/ :
Examples of legal words:
Legal words
The legal Model is the behavior of judges explaining the law while making decisions. Justices tend to make judgments based off past precedent. Judges subscribe to the legal model for public consumption. J...
...hat of how to apply law effectively. Now, I’m able to participate in casual conversations about sports, but I’m more interested in conversing about the structures of free agency, labor-related issues and the drafting and negotiation of contracts.
The merits of both the adversarial and inquisitorial system will be explored throughout this paper. The Australian rule of law best describes as all law should be applied equally and fairly. The five vital operations of the rule of law includes fairness, rationality, predictability, consistency, and impartially. The adversarial system adopts these operations by having a jury decide on the verdict and the judge being an impartial decision maker. In contrast, the inquisitorial system relies heavily on the judge. This can result in abusive power and bias of the judge when hearing evidence and delivering verdicts. The operations of the rule of law determine why the rule of law is best served by the adversarial system in Australia.
Case law/Common law – body of law developed over time by higher courts. Laws are c...
After analyzing the discourse community of law and the detailed process lawyers take in order to write an effective appeals brief, one can see that lawyers have a very specific and unique way of communicating that includes certain jargon unfamiliar and possibly incomprehensible to the general public. Although writing an appeal brief is only one aspect of many that government prosecuting attorneys such as Kenny Elser face in their jobs on a daily basis, it is also a very necessary job because not only is it used by a single discourse community in the law profession but utilized by the discourse community of law as a whole.
In every society around the world, the law is affecting everyone since it shapes the behavior and sense of right and wrong for every citizen in society. Laws are meant to control a society’s behavior by outlining the accepted forms of conduct. The law is designed as a neutral aspect existent to solve society’s problems, a system specially designed to provide people with peace and order. The legal system runs more efficiently when people understand the laws they are intended to follow along with their legal rights and responsibilities.
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
The Family Law Legislation Amendment Act of 2011 and whether it has Reduced Violence and Abuse for Women and Children
Therefore, for the development of the society, a legal, formal and universal system has to be established, that can deal with subjects, that cannot be resolved or addressed through natural, customary or religious law. Thus over time, the law scholars and sociologists started to understand the complexity and interrelationship between law and society.
In this essay, I will be discussing how the formal theory of the rule of law is an erroneous means of establishing laws within a state. A central theme to addressing this essay is the distinction between formal and substantive theories of the rule of law. In order to reach the conclusion of the formal theory being proven to be insufficient, one must first appreciate the significant advantages which the substantive theory obtains. However, before doing so, I will briefly mention the importance of the rule of law in society and the requirements it needs to fulfil. Most people would dispute that the significance of law in society is to obtain justice, however justice is simply a term which is determined subjectively, it relates to an individuals moral viewpoint.
The English legal system is ostensibly embedded on a foundation of a ‘high degree of certainty with adaptability’ based on a steady ‘mode’ of legal reasoning. This rests on four propositions
Common law is the concept that some of the core principles that form the basis of the English legal system come from judges as opposed to Parliament, with rulings from case to case developing predicedent, which forces lower courts to follow princaples set by higher cores but allows higher courts to overrule the descisions of lower courts. This allows the courts, over time to refine law. The courts can even decide to ignore rulings when considering to set it as precident with enough justification, this allows rooms for special cases. As a drawback to common law, the courts are sometimes unwilling to overrule long standing precidents. Slapper,...
Since there is a premise on which the judgment will be made, a proper benchmark, the judicial procedure occurs much quicker. For this reason, it is much more efficient in its process in relation to the codified system which does not follow this process of a precedent based system. As the decisions made are premised on antecedents, they have a firmer basis. This is an obvious advantage over the common law as the codified system of law has to rely on the creation of rules and legislation rather using case laws to create future laws.
Every nation has their own set of legal strategies they use to guide them in making important decisions. Each nation has its traditions and policies they follow. Through the world, there are two main types of legal systems that are used; most nations follow either common or civil law. Both the common law system and the civil law system share similarities in having courts, judges, and comparing cases to laws. While both systems share similarities, they also contain many differences, making them two very divergent legal systems.
Judicial Precedent "Within the present system of precedent in the English legal system, judges have very little discretion in their decision making." Judges have always been relied upon to interpret and apply the law. Therefore, their decisions should be fair and consistent so as the individuals seeking legal remedies would have more faith in the judicial system of the state. AS the UK has not a very complete and/or codified constitution, this doctrine is very much relied on as contrasted with other countries which seemed to have provisions for virtually any kind of offence, like France or the US where judges had only to refer to legislation.