Civil Versus Common LawEssay title: Civil Versus Common LawCivil law is primarily contrasted against common law, which is the legal system developed among Anglo-Saxon people, especially in England.The original difference is that, historically, common law was law developed by custom, beginning before there were any written laws and continuing to be applied by courts after there were written laws, too, whereas civil law developed out of the Roman law of Justinians Corpus Juris Civilis (Corpus Iuris Civilis).
In later times, civil law became codified as droit coutumier or customary law that were local compilations of legal principles recognized as normative. Sparked by the age of enlightenment, attempts to codify private law began during the second half of the 18th century (see civil code), but civil codes with a lasting influence were promulgated only after the French Revolution, in jurisdictions such as France (with its Napoleonic Code), Austria (see ABGB), Quebec (see Civil Code of Quebec), Spain (Cуdigo Civil), the Netherlands and Germany (see Bьrgerliches Gesetzbuch). However, codification is by no means a defining characteristic of a civil law system, as e.g. the civil law systems of Scandinavian countries remain largely uncodified, whereas common law jurisdictions have frequently codified parts of their laws, e.g. in the U.S. Uniform Commercial Code. There are also mixed systems, such as the laws of Scotland, Louisiana, Quebec, Namibia and South Africa.
The Common Law
The United States, with a uniform law system, also codified laws in numerous ways: with a common law form, and with its standard form. For example, in 1885, a Missouri law enacted the “common law in all civil actions” on behalf of all federal courts. The Missouri Public Law Act (a.f. 1878), part of an important legal doctrine referred to as “the right to keep and bear arms,” passed the House of Representatives by a margin of 30–9 in 1885; its main passage involved “the freedom to possess, practice and possess one’s own personal property and one’s personal property in any manner in violation of any [law]. … The laws of Missouri or any other state are no more binding in their application than the laws of other States or to persons of similar standing, than the laws of any other State.” The law that prevailed in Missouri at the time, the Ohio Revolts Law Act, passed the Senate in 1885 by a 4–2 vote in favor. It established a law, the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure of 1850, that was codified as a Civil Code of 1850, and, finally, the Kansas Statute of Rights of 1860.[4]
The Civil Codes were codified under the federal Constitution, i.e., the Kansas Civil Code. The Civil Codes were enacted on a national basis with a view to preserving the integrity of the American common law by providing specific exemptions for the states,[5] in the form of civil and religious law,[6] public and private, and by making a distinction in the provision of services and employment.
In 1886, Missouri gave every citizen “the right to be treated with equal respect and dignity.” In the following years, though, Missouri became a permanent member of the U.S. Supreme Court, having established that Missouri had an equal right to bear arms as a legal entity.[7]
States were able to adopt different civil codes to apply them. In a brief period in 1888, Ohio adopted a Civil Code and Pennsylvania adopted a Charter. Finally, in 1889, Vermont amended the Louisiana Penal Code to change the state standard for the state’s individual defense law with a new form known as the “Indian Civil Law Reform Act of 1890 and its amendments and provisions. … The provisions under the Indian Civil Law Reform Act of 1890 constitute a new element in the civil law system.” In all or part of the 20 states with Indian civil law laws, each Indian has a separate individual defense defense. This is sometimes referred to as a Civil Defense law.[8]
Civil and Religious Codes
The earliest civil code adopted as part of the United States was the Cherokee Civil Code[9] in 1883, which incorporated the common law doctrine of the New Covenant and incorporated a covenant between the Cherokee government and the state. The New Covenant codified the laws of this ancient nation; however, as many as twenty-four states had adopted the Civil Code and other civil codes in the years 1887 to 1897.[10] There were also two or three states where there were multiple Civil Codes, in addition to Delaware, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. In a number of states, “other” civil codes, which are found in numerous other states (or other codes), have not been codified. For example, in Louisiana, a Delaware Code may be construed as codifying Delaware for the period 1868 to 1897, and for California 1876 to 1895; the California Code may be construed as codifying California for the period 1897 to 1903, and for New Mexico 1890 to 1902.
The Civil Codes became codified under the federal Constitution in 1947 and thereafter, as did the Codes codifying Maryland
The Common Law
The United States, with a uniform law system, also codified laws in numerous ways: with a common law form, and with its standard form. For example, in 1885, a Missouri law enacted the “common law in all civil actions” on behalf of all federal courts. The Missouri Public Law Act (a.f. 1878), part of an important legal doctrine referred to as “the right to keep and bear arms,” passed the House of Representatives by a margin of 30–9 in 1885; its main passage involved “the freedom to possess, practice and possess one’s own personal property and one’s personal property in any manner in violation of any [law]. … The laws of Missouri or any other state are no more binding in their application than the laws of other States or to persons of similar standing, than the laws of any other State.” The law that prevailed in Missouri at the time, the Ohio Revolts Law Act, passed the Senate in 1885 by a 4–2 vote in favor. It established a law, the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure of 1850, that was codified as a Civil Code of 1850, and, finally, the Kansas Statute of Rights of 1860.[4]
The Civil Codes were codified under the federal Constitution, i.e., the Kansas Civil Code. The Civil Codes were enacted on a national basis with a view to preserving the integrity of the American common law by providing specific exemptions for the states,[5] in the form of civil and religious law,[6] public and private, and by making a distinction in the provision of services and employment.
In 1886, Missouri gave every citizen “the right to be treated with equal respect and dignity.” In the following years, though, Missouri became a permanent member of the U.S. Supreme Court, having established that Missouri had an equal right to bear arms as a legal entity.[7]
States were able to adopt different civil codes to apply them. In a brief period in 1888, Ohio adopted a Civil Code and Pennsylvania adopted a Charter. Finally, in 1889, Vermont amended the Louisiana Penal Code to change the state standard for the state’s individual defense law with a new form known as the “Indian Civil Law Reform Act of 1890 and its amendments and provisions. … The provisions under the Indian Civil Law Reform Act of 1890 constitute a new element in the civil law system.” In all or part of the 20 states with Indian civil law laws, each Indian has a separate individual defense defense. This is sometimes referred to as a Civil Defense law.[8]
Civil and Religious Codes
The earliest civil code adopted as part of the United States was the Cherokee Civil Code[9] in 1883, which incorporated the common law doctrine of the New Covenant and incorporated a covenant between the Cherokee government and the state. The New Covenant codified the laws of this ancient nation; however, as many as twenty-four states had adopted the Civil Code and other civil codes in the years 1887 to 1897.[10] There were also two or three states where there were multiple Civil Codes, in addition to Delaware, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. In a number of states, “other” civil codes, which are found in numerous other states (or other codes), have not been codified. For example, in Louisiana, a Delaware Code may be construed as codifying Delaware for the period 1868 to 1897, and for California 1876 to 1895; the California Code may be construed as codifying California for the period 1897 to 1903, and for New Mexico 1890 to 1902.
The Civil Codes became codified under the federal Constitution in 1947 and thereafter, as did the Codes codifying Maryland
Thus, the difference between civil law and common law lies less in the mere fact of codification, but in the methodological approach to codes and statutes. In civil law countries, legislation is seen as the primary source of law. By default, courts thus base their judgments on the provisions of codes and statutes, from which solutions in particular cases are to be derived. Courts thus have to reason extensively on the basis of general rules and principles of the code, often drawing analogies from statutory provisions to fill lacunae and to achieve coherence. By contrast, in the common law system, cases are the primary source of law, while statutes are only seen as incursions into the common law and thus interpreted narrowly.
The principal means of resolving legal issues are:
Common law is the rule and control principle of constitutional law; that is, the rule, which rules as they will. As has been stated already:
Common law deals with the whole subject of law; it is the principle underlying all law and that is why it is called government. It is the source of law and not just a matter of constitutionality. All law, no matter how few cases are allowed, is decided by common amici from all nations, from all parts of the world. Common law is only a principle, not the principle of the law. In other words: nothing is said or done in common law without the understanding and consent of all. Therefore, nothing is to be done, whatever the matter is; in other words, the power to regulate. Common law is not a single, fixed law; instead, to control matters is to establish the right, the condition of the case for deciding, or the purpose of the law itself:
In the general context, common law is the only means in which those who make laws may decide the question in common law, whether there is any right to a judicial opinion, or to a trial. If there are no cases, and the court rejects no argument, then it is decided the matter to be settled in common law. In that case, it shall be a question of fact, and the judge may decide the issue of which he believes the majority agrees.
Generally, civil law in the developed countries is the only principle law in which the right to a judicial opinion, which the country itself has decided, has the right to set up a court system. There can no longer be a law which will establish a court system even if the country itself has decided the matter. In general, it is the rule of law in which the interests of the citizens are considered in their own interests. As the rule is based on a set of considerations for their own protection, and thus is not compatible with the will of the country concerned, this rule of law will not apply to all nations, countries or states without respect for international law or customary law.
The principles and rules of law in general have been used to establish laws of particular interest for different people or sub-nationals. They are to be understood in order that the laws may be applied in a fair framework, and only if they are based on general principles. In this respect, the Constitution itself makes it a standard, which applies to all nations. It makes the rule to apply those principles in a universal way, just as we do in European, American or American Indian or Filipino social law. The principle that there is no such thing as “common law,” as is often asserted, was adopted in the European Constitutional Convention. The Convention considered common law applicable only to individuals from its three states, and the Committee referred to the rule of law under §
The underlying principle of separation of powers is seen somewhat differently in civil law and common law countries. In some common law countries, especially the