Differentiation From Other Major Legal Systems
It should be noted that it has been said that little is known of continental European civil law systems from a comparative law perspective. The table below contains essential disparities (and in some cases similarities) between the world's four major legal systems.
| Common law | Civil law | Socialist law | Islamic law | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other names | Anglo-American, English, judge-made, legislation from the bench | Continental, Romano-Germanic | Social | Religious law, Sharia |
| Source of law | Case law, statutes/legislation | Statutes/legislation | Statutes/legislation | Religious documents, case law |
| Lawyers | Control courtroom | Judges dominate trials | Judges dominate trials | Secondary role |
| Judges' qualifications | Experienced lawyers (appointed or elected) | Career judges | Career bureaucrats, Party members | Religious as well as legal training |
| Degree of judicial independence | High | High; separate from the executive and the legislative branches of government | Very limited | Ranges from very limited to high |
| Juries | Provided at trial level | May adjudicate in conjunction with judges in serious criminal matters | Often used at lowest level | Allowed in Maliki school, not allowed in other schools |
| Policy-making role | Courts share in balancing power | Courts have equal but separate power | Courts are subordinate to the legislature | Courts and other government branches are theoretically subordinate to the Shari'a. In practice, courts historically made the Shari'a, while today, the religious courts are generally subordinate to the executive. |
| Examples | Australia, UK (except Scotland), India (except Goa), Ireland, Singapore, Hong Kong, USA (except Louisiana), Canada (except Quebec), Pakistan, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Norway (to some extent) | All European Union states except UK and Ireland; Brazil, China (except Hong Kong), Japan, Mexico, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, Quebec, Louisiana, Goa | Soviet Union and other communist regimes | Many Muslim countries have adopted parts of Sharia Law. Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, UAE, Oman, Sudan, Yemen |
Civil law is primarily contrasted with common law, which is the legal system developed first in England, and later among English-speaking peoples of the world. Despite their differences, the two systems are quite similar from a historical point of view. Both evolved in much the same way, though at different paces. The Roman law underlying civil law developed mainly from customary law that was refined with caselaw and legislation. Canon law further refined court procedure. Similarly, English law developed from Norman and Anglo-Saxon customary law, further refined by caselaw and legislation. The differences of course being that (1) Roman law had crystallised many of its principles and mechanisms in the form of the Justinian Code, which drew from caselaw, scholarly commentary, and senatorial statutes; and (2) civilian caselaw has persuasive authority, not binding authority as under common law.
Codification, however, is by no means a defining characteristic of a civil law system. For example, the statutes that govern the civil law systems of Sweden and other Nordic countries or Roman-Dutch countries are not grouped into larger, expansive codes like those found in France and Germany.
Read more about this topic: Civil Law (legal System)
Famous quotes containing the words major, legal and/or systems:
“A dead martyr is just another corpse.”
—Leo V. Gordon, U.S. screenwriter, and Arthur Hiller. Major Craig (Rock Hudson)
“In the course of the actual attainment of selfish ends—an attainment conditioned in this way by universality—there is formed a system of complete interdependence, wherein the livelihood, happiness, and legal status of one man is interwoven with the livelihood, happiness, and rights of all. On this system, individual happiness, etc. depend, and only in this connected system are they actualized and secured.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)
“We have done scant justice to the reasonableness of cannibalism. There are in fact so many and such excellent motives possible to it that mankind has never been able to fit all of them into one universal scheme, and has accordingly contrived various diverse and contradictory systems the better to display its virtues.”
—Ruth Benedict (1887–1948)