History, common law system, common law, English legal system, colonization, doctrine of precedent, Supreme Court, House of Lords, JCPC Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, national court, Norman Conquest of 1066, royal court, local court, seigniorial court, local assembly, magistrates, judges, lawyers, European Court of Justice, Crown Court, High Court, Magistrates' court, County Court, Court of Appeal, Divisional courts of the High Court, Court of Justice of the European Union, English court system, UK United Kingdom, the UK, Central Crown Court, London, Old Bailey, commonwealth, Crown Dependencies
As a direct result of the colonization by the British, many of its states naturally acquired this common law system, being the English law in globo, maintaining its primary principles, procedures, actors and modes of proof. As a consequence of this adoption and utilization of English law, and the subsequent fall and dissolution of the British Empire, the common law system itself is no longer directly associated with the United Kingdom.
These states, which still operate under the common law system, now have individual liberty to interpret and pinpoint new and enduring principles autonomously. However, despite this, the United Kingdom still maintains to be a substantial influence over other supreme courts of common law, namely due to the notoriety of its Supreme Court (House of Lords) and through its Judiciary and Privy Committee. This can be seen in the workings of other national courts, where judgments made in the House of Lords and in the Committee are occasionally referred to in the judgments and conclusions made within other national courts. Other supreme courts, particularly in the English-speaking states, occasionally utilize these solutions. Despite this, there are instances where these English-speaking states do not follow the evaluation or particular case law deriving from the House of Lords, and this is where some differences may lie between the common law systems.
[...] Despite this there are instances where these English-speaking states do not follow the evaluation or particular case law deriving from the House of Lords, and this is where some differences may lie between the common law systems. Purpose of this work and plan The objective of this work is to produce a summary thesis on the subject, "origin, evolution and influence of the Common Law system on the English legal system". This work will be based primarily on information and notions developed in the "Legal English" course, given by Professor Mamadou BEYE. [...]
[...] This differs greatly from countries where the civil law system is in place, where the initial references are made towards the established code and are only afterwards applied to the facts within the case. There is also a substantial contrast in the way in which the two systems' trials operate. In a civil law trial, documents are the foundation of the trial, however in a common law trial the attendance of witnesses, the defendant, the jury, the judge and the accused are a necessary requirement. [...]
[...] Subsequent to this, in 1873 the two differing courts and legal traditions were combined. Due to England's vast influence and exportation of its common law and legal system throughout the world, within its ex-colonies and within the commonwealth, England's legal system is widely known as the mother of all legal systems worldwide. The US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada (Common law daughters of the English legal system) all sustain a direct link to the English legal system, not only due to the exportation and usage of the English language in these countries, but also through the close contact they have to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. [...]
[...] The difference in the common law system being, however, that the authority coming from the judge has a much greater impact than through the simple interpretation of documents. Ultimately, what makes this legal system stand out from the rest is by the simple fact that in common law, the law is formed through the judges' ruling in each case. As a consequence of this, the vast majority of the law in England was in fact formulated by the judiciary within real life case proceedings. This law with the judge at its head is recognized as the common law. [...]
[...] Scotland and Northern Ireland, however, maintain a different legal system to that of England and Wales. England's legal system is largely based on what is known as the principles of precedent and stare decisis. The principles of precedent being that a judge's single ruling can in fact binds the rulings of his successors, and stare decisis being a legal principle where judges must follow the previously established ruling that has been concluded prior to him. In addition to this it is also a fact that the higher courts have the authority to bind the lower courts. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
