Common Law Vs Civil Law Essay

Law is a system of rules that has been set up by the legislative branch of our government. It is a must that every person in that country follow these laws, or severe consequences will be held against that person. In every court house legal systems are held. There are two common types of legal systems used, common law and civil law. Common law is used by countries that are from the British colonies, as this type of system was originated from England, when King Henry II wanted to combine the laws and customs together. Whereas, the countries that use civil law are from the European colonies (Common Law vs Civil Law,2009). Even though, both laws are commonly used, they differ in terms of the constitution, the jury’s opinion, the role of the

Judges, and in terms of the sources of the law.
There are many ways of explaining why common law is different from civil law. For one, civil law tend to have written constitution, which are the rules or principles of that particular area. Whereas, common law does not always have a written constitution (Key Features of Common Law or Civil Law Systems, 2016).

Another difference would be the consideration of the jury duty. It seems like common law cares about the jury’s opinion when it comes to solving murderous crimes. As the job of the jury duty is to decide whether the person on the stand is guilty or not. Unlike civil law, where it seems like they do not really care about the jury’s opinion because to them it is no more than a guide (The Economist Explains, 2013). In addition, force of law is considered when the court has to make it's decisions in the civil jurisdictions, whereas in the common jurisdictions, there is a force of law when the court makes it's decision, also they tend to follows up with the precedent, which are earlier events that may be used to help out with the case (Common Law vs Civil Law, 2009). The third difference between common law and civil law system is the role the judges conduct in these systems. According to the common law system, the judge has an active role, as his job is to develop rules and then applying them according to the case. However, during the trial, his role is to listen to both parties and then judge. Meanwhile, the judge's role in the civil law system is to be an investigator, since his role is limited and can only judge on existing lawful

provision. It is considered limited because of little amount of evidence that was given to him (Common Law vs Civil Law, 2009). So, as a highly qualified judge it is his job to see who is guilty and who is not. Finally, the sources of law are one of the main differences between the common law and the civil law system. The difference between the sources is that in the common law system, they focus on the cases, experience, practices, and even the decisions made by the court. On the other hand, the sources of law in the civil law system are focused on the types of laws such as, written law, administrative law, common law, etc. Another source of law used in the civil law systems are the codes (Common Law vs Civil Law, 2009). Therefore, we can conclude that legal systems differ from one another.
In the conclusion, we can say that not all legal systems have written constitutions and that some are stricter than others. For instance, in a common law, the judge can be creative when applying his rules. Unlike civil law, the rules can only be applied on existing lawful provision. So in other words no court creation. However, we can state that no matter what the legal system is in both cases judges need to be fair and loyal when giving their judgements.