Kerangka maklumat untuk slide

CIVIL LAW SYSTEMS Roman law Continental law Napoleonic law A system whereby laws are legislated by parliament / some other form of representative government and codified (i.e, brought together).

Distinguished from common law mainly because they come from parliaments, not from court cases. Indeed, in the civil code systems, the courts do not usually have as much freedom to interpret laws. In the original Napoleonic courts, judges were specifically banned from interpreting statutes laws. The underlying principle of civil code systems is that the laws applied to citizens are made by citizens through their political representatives. Judges are there to administer laws, not make them. Laws are codified : laws of a similar nature are bundled together to create a rational system across a common area Advanced societies try to ensure that all laws have consistent principles and interact with each other in a logical way without conflict between laws. In complex societies, codified laws are vast and detailed. Critics say this mean they are hard to change but proponents argue they give certainly and predictability. Civil code systems are mainly inquisitorial rather than adversarial : -this mean courts are there to track down the truth, not to be a forum where two sides battle to demonstrate to a judge or jury who is right and who is wrong. Judges in civil code trials are usually more active in questioning witnesses, challenging evidence and in some cases, even directing investigations.

This is quite different from common law trials where the judge is supposed to be impartial. COMMON LAW SYSTEMS developed from a set of traditional laws first brought together in England around the 12th century. The names derives from the fact that it was one set of laws common to the whole kingdom, rather than different sets of laws used by individual communities or tribes.

one of the distinguishing features of common law is, it is developed through usage rather than being imposed by codified legislation as with the civil code system. Legislation mean laws, sometimes also called statutes, that are made by a representative body such as parliament. Codification is when individual laws of a similar nature are bundled together under one new, overarching law.

Common law was developed based on the outcomes of individual court cases. Each court case provides a basis for judging the next case of a similar nature. Over the centuries and after millions of court cases, this process led to a body of laws which cover most aspects of society and are based on the principles shared by society in general

==core principles== which guide common law, though they are not necessarily unique to it. These include: -the concept of binding precedent, where a decision of the higher courts on the same matter binds the lower courts unless overridden by the higher court or by a specific legislation. Hence, the courts not only have to determine the facts in a case but they also have to argue all the relevant legal precedents set by previous courts making decisions on similar matters. Both the prosecution and the defence lawyers present not only evidence

of the events but also the arguments of previous cases. For this reason, judgement in common law cases are often long and involved. This is so that future lawyers, juries and judges can see how a verdict was reached when considering their own cases. Traditionally, these lengthy and intricate judgements were printed in law reports or journals.

-it is adversarial, which means that parties involved in any dispute have the chance to present their arguments equally before a neutral umpire for a decision. Depending on the court, these neutral umpire for a decision. Depending on the court, these neutral umpires can be judges, juries, magistrates or chairs of tribunals, in some cases a combination of these. The judge, or jury, is expected to hear all the evidence presented by each side, together with legal arguments, and make a decision on who has the strongest case. If one side does not like the outcome, they may ask the court for leave to appeal to a higher court, where the main points of the case are argued again in front of a new judge or a group of judges sitting as a bench. This adversarial system can go all the way to the highest court in the land if the matter is important enough or involves significant constitutional matters. The highest courts decision is usually final, unless new evidence resurfaces in later years which convinces them to reopen the case.

3. Case law coexist with statute law and, in most cases, a constitution. Following the case law aforementioned, judges interpret the constitution and statutes (i.e., parliamentmade laws) where they are unclear. Of course, the constitution of a country is the paramount law and judges are not able to change its basic provisions. But even with the constitution, they can interpret how it is applied in real life. In strong democracies, judges have a role in interpreting laws as they interact with each other. For example, a court may decide that the legislation passed by a parliament is unlawful because it clashes with more important constitutional rights. Such cases are usually determined by the highest court in the nation or state, such as a high court or a supreme court. If these courts decide a statute is unconstitutional, parliament will normally amend it, otherwise it cannot be successfully applied. The ability for judges to interpret statute law against a background of common law means the legislation does not have to state every possible circumstance.

It can state the general principles and set limits (for example on the maximum amount an offender can be defined) and leave the rest for the courts to determine in line with other statutes laws and common law precedents. Opponents of common law say this gives too much power to judges, whereas its supporters see this ability to interpret legal statutes in real-life situations as a major strength. As in many things to do with common law, or any law for the matter, the quality of judges and other people in the legal system such as lawyers and the police, determine how successfully the system will work.