Origins and Historical Development
English Common Law originated in medieval England, particularly after the Norman Conquest in 1066. It developed through royal courts (like the King's Bench and Common Pleas) where judges applied precedents from prior cases. This system spread to other English-speaking countries, such as the United States, Canada, and Australia, via colonization. It's "common" because it was uniform across the realm, unlike local customs.
Roman Civil Law, also known as civil law tradition, traces back to ancient Rome's Twelve Tables (c. 450 BCE) and evolved through imperial edicts, jurists' writings, and codifications like Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis (6th century CE). It influenced continental Europe (e.g., France's Napoleonic Code, Germany's BGB) and spread to Latin America, parts of Africa, and Asia through colonialism and legal reforms. It's called "civil" to distinguish it from ecclesiastical or criminal law, but the term broadly refers to codified systems.
Primary Sources of Law
- Common Law: Relies heavily on judicial precedent (stare decisis), where judges' decisions in past cases bind future rulings in similar situations. Statutes (parliamentary laws) exist but are interpreted through case law. Equity (fairness-based remedies, like injunctions) supplements strict common law rules, developed in separate Chancery courts.
- Civil Law: Centers on comprehensive codes enacted by legislatures, such as civil, penal, or commercial codes. These are systematic, abstract, and derived from Roman principles. Judicial decisions are persuasive but not binding; judges apply the code directly rather than creating new law.
Role of Judges and Judicial Process
- Common Law: Judges are active creators of law, interpreting statutes and evolving rules through adversarial proceedings (lawyers argue opposing sides, judge as referee). Trials emphasize oral arguments, cross-examination, and jury decisions on facts. This leads to a flexible, case-specific system that adapts incrementally.
- Civil Law: Judges are primarily appliers of the code, acting as inquisitorial investigators who gather evidence proactively. Proceedings are written and structured, with less emphasis on oral debate or juries (though some systems use lay judges). Decisions aim for consistency with the code, resulting in more predictable but less adaptable outcomes.
Key Substantive Differences
| Aspect |
English Common Law |
Roman Civil Law |
| Contract Law |
Based on mutual assent and consideration (something of value exchanged); implied terms from custom or fairness. |
Emphasizes good faith and intent; contracts classified by type (e.g., sale, lease) with detailed code provisions. |
| Tort Law |
Focuses on negligence and fault; remedies often monetary damages; evolved from writs (specific remedies). |
Stresses strict liability in some areas (e.g., product defects); broader delict system with codified wrongs. |
| Property Law |
Distinguishes legal vs. equitable title; trusts central for holding property for others. |
Absolute ownership (dominium); trusts less prominent, replaced by usufruct or security interests. |
| Criminal Law |
Adversarial trials with presumption of innocence; common law crimes like murder defined by precedent. |
Inquisitorial process; crimes exhaustively listed in codes, with codified penalties. |
Modern Implications and Spread
Common law systems (about 30% of the world) prioritize flexibility and individual rights, suiting common-law democracies like the UK and US. Civil law systems (about 60%) emphasize certainty and state codification, dominant in Europe, Latin America, and Japan. Hybrid systems (e.g., Scotland, Louisiana, South Africa) blend elements. Both have influenced international law, but common law's precedent model aids rapid adaptation to new issues like technology, while civil law's codes provide accessible, uniform rules.
|
|
