Differences and Similarities between the Civil and Common Law Judicial System

1122 Words3 Pages

Nowadays every legal system wants to achieve justice. Different legal traditions in the world have given a different meaning of this concept by following one of the two legal systems: a civil law system and a common law system. The civil law system emerged from Roman law and throughout many centuries has been developed in continental Europe and often is called a “continental legal system”, achieving its prominence through development of aqui communitare in Europe. The common law system emerged in England during the Anglo-Saxon period and was developed by British colonies, reaching its peak in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. There are many differences as well as similarities between the civil and the common law judicial system, but the scope of this essay will be mainly focused on fundamental differences between the civil and common law judicial systems between so-called adversarial and inquisitorial systems, the different roles of judges and juries, attorneys, parties, and witnesses, the different emphasis in the structure of trials, and different strategies to optimize finding of truth and solving controversies. In conclusion, this essay will identify criticisms and advantages of each system. One of the main fundamental differences between the civil and common law systems relies on the sources of law and its compilation. In the civil law system the main principles and the rules are codified in a code that are considered as the primary source of law prevailing over a case law that is regarded as a secondary source of law. In contrast to the civil law system, the common law is not generally codified and shaped through legislation, but mainly by a case law and it represents a separate source of law independent o... ... middle of paper ... ...tems. The adversarial system does not focus on the truth rather the trial and process is designed to give the parties and their lawyers the opportunity in presenting the truth. Parties’ control of developing evidence and their lawyers’ decision on how witnesses’ examinations should proceed is a critical approach towards finding the truth. By contrast, the inquisitorial system is based on finding the truth; judges do have control in the fact finding process, hearing witnesses and allowing opposing parties to explain their side without being subject of examination tactics. The supports of the inquisitorial system believe that this feature of an adversarial system tolerates parties to provide only evidences favorable to their case. Thus, the adversarial system will serve to the parties’ best interest to manipulate the justice system, rather than in finding the truth.

More about Differences and Similarities between the Civil and Common Law Judicial System

Open Document