More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities and differences between common law and civil law
Similarities and differences between common law and civil law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
As is well known, There are many differences in legal system between Canada and China, since Canada is a country whose legal system is mainly common law system except Quebec, and China is a country whose legal system is civil law system based on Socialism. Since this passage could not summarize all the differences between two legal systems in such short passage,and the author is more interested in legislation which is the beginning symbol of law, so this passage will focus on comparing the differences of legislation between two countries in the following section.
The most obvious difference of legislation between two legal systems is that whether the judges could make law. In Canada except the Quebec, the judges could make decisions when they
…show more content…
The second difference in legislation between two countries is that the people who make laws and the aim of legislation, in Canada, it is the representatives who are elected by people make laws. However, in China, the people who nominally make laws are representatives who are in the National People's Congress, they are not elected directly by people but by lower class representatives, and only the lowest class representatives are elected directly by people. For some reasons, people can not enter into an election contest freely, the qualifications and the numbers of people who can enter into the election contest are determined by the Communist Party of China, so people may even not be familiar with the representatives who they are going to vote for. Taking myself as an example, I lived in China for 22 years, the first and the only time I had chance to vote and knew ballots was when I was
In 1759, the Canadian Court Justice system was brought to Canada by the French. After the battle of Quebec, all of Canada then followed the English common law system except for Quebec 1. Based on my understanding and knowledge of N. Christie’s arguments and the Canadian court system, I believe that Christie’s criticism of modern legal system is fair and it effects our current court system today.
The Canadian justice system, although much evolved, is having difficulty eliminating bias from the legal system. Abdurahman Ibrahim Hassan, a 39 year old man, died on June 11 in a Peterborough hospital, while under immigration detention. He came to Canada in 1993 as a refugee and was suffering from mental, and physical health issues such as diabetes and bipolar disorder. There was an overwhelming amount of secrecy surrounding the death of this troubled Toronto man, and to this day no light has been shed on this tragedy. (Keung, 2015) An analysis of the official version of the law will reveal how race class and gender coincide with the bias within the legal system.
Any person, place or event that has held the honour of being commemorated in Canada has been recognized of an extreme importance to the country. It is impossible to research commemoration in Canada without reading about world war one and two; The great wars are arguably the most commemorated events in History let alone Canada. Understanding this they are not the only events that receive attention from Canada, the government recognizes many other occurrences as, well, anything from Sir John A. Macdonald day on the 11th of January to the anniversary of the statute of Westminster on the 11th of December. I do not believe that any one event can be placed above or below another, and that they all hold a value in whatever way that may be. This Essay
The merits of both the adversarial and inquisitorial system will be explored throughout this paper. The Australian rule of law best describes as all law should be applied equally and fairly. The five vital operations of the rule of law includes fairness, rationality, predictability, consistency, and impartially. The adversarial system adopts these operations by having a jury decide on the verdict and the judge being an impartial decision maker. In contrast, the inquisitorial system relies heavily on the judge. This can result in abusive power and bias of the judge when hearing evidence and delivering verdicts. The operations of the rule of law determine why the rule of law is best served by the adversarial system in Australia.
In legal theory, there is a great debate over whether or not law should be used to enforce morality. The sides of the debate can be presented as a continuum. At one end, there is the libertarian view, which holds that morality is an individual belief and that the state should not interfere in the affairs of the individual. According to this view, a democracy cannot limit or enforce morality. At the other end, there is the communitarian position, which justifies the community as a whole deciding what moral values are, and hence justifies using the law to enforce community values. For libertarians, judges should play a prominent role in limiting the state, while for communitarians, judges should have as small a role as possible. In between these two extremes sit the liberal egalitarians, who attempt to reconcile democratic decision-making about moral values with liberalism. The problem is made more complex when one considers that both law and morality are contested concepts. Two recent cases where this continuum can be illustrated are Canada [Attorney-General] vs. Mossap, and Egan vs. Canada. In this essay, I will attempt to explore some of the issues produced in these two cases. I will begin with a summary each case, followed by an analysis of the major themes involved. I will then place the issues in a larger, democratic framework, and explore the role of law in enforcing morality in a democracy. I will then prove how the communitarian position - as articulated by Patrick Devlin - supports the decisions given in Mossap and Egan, and how even the great proponents of libertarianism - Mill and von Hayek - would agree that the decisions were just. A conclusion will then follow.
The Canadian Criminal Justice System is, for the most part, reflective of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and various Supreme Court of Canada case-law. Everyone who finds themselves on the opposing end of the Criminal Justice System is entitled to certain protections every step of the way, beginning even before the arrest; laws protect us from unreasonable investigative techniques, guarantee certain rights at point of arrest, and provide us with the right to counsel. The bail court departs from the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard in that the crown only needs to prove on a balance of probabilities (Kellough, 1996, p. 175) in order to take away a person’s freedom. It is for this reason I decided to limit the scope of my observations to the bail court. What I found is a systemic evidence of a two-tier justice system. In this essay, I will outline the roles of the 'regular players' of the bail court and demonstrate how the current bail process essentially transforms the Canadian Criminal Justice System into a two-tier system where the affluent and powerful are able to receive preferential treatment over the poor.
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
What impact does immigration have on the economy of Canada? This research points out possible effects on the employment and wages of domestic workers, Canada’s trade with other countries, the size and growth rate of the economy and the prices that Canadians pay for goods and services. Immigration has directly affected the through the addition of workers to the labor force. At the most basic level, immigration increases the supply of labor in the economy. More labor means more goods and services being produced, so that national output (GDP) rises. Immigration also affects the prices of the inputs that are used to produce these goods and services. Those inputs for which immigrant labor substitutes will suffer as the prices of their
The following is an adjusted version of an argument I presented in Critical Thinking last semester. My opinion has not changed, just expanded.. :)
The symbol of the Canadian judicial system is the balanced scales of justice. When a wrongful act is committed, the scales of justice are greatly misplaced and require a solution to counterbalance the crime and restore balance. Additionally, the scales represent the idea that law should be viewed objectively and the determination of innocence should be made without bias. The Canadian criminal justice system encapsulates the idea of the scale of justice, to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate the law. One of the most important aspects of this system is that an individual charged with a criminal offence is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The current system has two prevailing methods involved in the process of dealing with crime: Retributive and restorative justice. This paper will analyze aspects of retributive justice and restorative justice, with reference to their respective philosophies, for the purpose of finding which is more effective at achieving justice and maintaining balance.
Kahn, J. (2005, September 21). Deep Flaws, and Little Justice, in China's Court System. In New York Times. Retrieved November 15, 2013
In every society around the world, the law affects everyone since it shapes the behavior and sense of right and wrong for every citizen in society. Laws are meant to control a society’s behavior by outlining the accepted forms of conduct. The law is designed as a neutral aspect to solve society’s problems, a system specially designed to provide people with peace and order. The legal system runs more efficiently when people understand the laws they are intended to follow along with their legal rights and responsibilities. Within the legal system, there is the Canadian criminal justice system, which is meant to guarantee the safety of citizens within the country and is used to sustain social control and deliver justice for a society.
Legal Pluralism is the presence of various legal systems within a single country or a geographical area. Legal Pluralism is omnipresent although it is generally assumed to exist in countries only with a colonial past. This is because in most countries with a colonial past, colonial laws co-exist alongside indigenous laws. However, if we look at the expansive definition of legal pluralism, it can be said that every society or country if legally plural. The modern definition of legal pluralism also deals with the issues of relation between state and non-state legal orders. It shows the dichotomy that exists between customary legal norms and state law. The judiciary of India has upheld this principle of pluralism in many cases by showing that
Part of the grounds for arguing in favor of the common law system over the codified system is its characteristically equitable qualities. Since antecedents are pursued in all cases, everyone gets the same treatment. This same legal procedure is administered to everyone in spite of their position or creed. Therefore, this system of going by antecedents which had hitherto been set usually leads to equity and fairness. This system of law also has the advantage over the codified system by offering protection to persons via the law of tort.
Legal realism defines legal rights and duties as whatever the court says they are. Out of all the legal theories we have examined in class, I personally believe that this is the one that best exemplifies the purpose of law and would best suit and benefit society. The Dimensions of Law textbook defines legal realism as “the school of legal philosophy that examines law in a realistic rather than theoretical fashion; the belief that law is determined by what actually happens in court as judges interpret and apply law.”