Distinction between Common Law and statute law (written law) :
It means that part of law which is contained in the decision of the court. Indeed, in England and Wales law isn’t only passed by Parliament. . This is the reason why which will explain later Why do we use this Common Law to describe the body of law from the decision? We have to go back in the history to understand this meaning.
English history, before the Normand invasion: the administration of justice was entirely left to and the law applied by these local courts was and so different from one right of the other in the country. The law of the court was a law practiced in the local courts. This situation has changed with the Normand conquest. Guillaume the Conquer invaded England in 1066. The invasion changed a lot of things in the legal system. New courts, royal court have been created and deformed curia Regis. This court sit only in Westminster and many people couldn’t afford with the money to travel and go to Westminster whenever they needed to recourse the justice. The second did was to create . These judges were appointed by the king. We can say that since people couldn’t go to Westminster but Westminster comes to the people. . But the people preferred to go before the royal justices instead near the local courses. . Why did they trust more the royal court than the local courts?
First argument is that because they were at royal court .
- English Law – English legal system
- Lawyers in the english legal system : Solicitors and Barristers
- The independence of the judiciary in England and Wales
- Lord Chancellor, lord Chief Justice (authorities of the judicial system)
- Supreme court and Court of appeal
- High Court : Chancery and Queen’s Bench Division
- Lower courts : Magistrate’s courts, Crown court, county court
- Foreign Law in the English Courts : conflict of laws rule
- How does the European court of Human Rights affect the UK?
- Application of european law by English courts
The second argument is that maybe this court is more important that the local courts. Civility nation was about land possessions. It was the only way of becoming… civility nation was meanly… . Representation of the king has no relationship with the citizens.
The procedure followed by this court appeared more serious than the followed of the local courts.
They didn’t want to impose the royal court but the succeed convinced the people to follow this court.
Main characteristics of the royal court: this courts are centralized, different kind of courts are in Westminster. . The king is the source of justice. The idea of justice is a prerogative of the crown, the king. . The king had to secured peace and so justice. But of course this was hard for just one man. The king but the courts were only in Westminster. .
The in England even today is very . There’s only one first instance court in England which is the . The centralized system is still alive today. Of course, the centralization has been newest.
The second factor which we is that they have . The first reason for having only a few judges is that the Common Law system was very limited. That means that huge members of actions wereabounding to fail because there isn’t fit to recognize form of action. . Formal action, specific form of action.
A big part of the work was left to the jury. The jury has to decide all the matters of fact in a trial. The legal work only for the judges, the fact has been determined by the jury.
The jury was used for the trials.
There was a specific amend of money to pay. This amend was high. They can’t bring an action before the courts. There are still very few judges in England, the judicial function in England will main very prestigious. The social position and the prestige isn’t the same in both countries.
The idea of having a centralized system was good for the king to control it but also was good because the judges worked at the same place, they knew each other very well and they could speak together about the cases they have to decide. The fact that they know each other gave uniformity to the decisions and this is how a Common Law has been created. It was a Common law because the judges could discuss and achieve the same result whenever the same case arose. Nevertheless there was judges didn’t create the Common Law out of nothing. They just didn’t imagine the best solution out of nowhere. . So they use customary law as a source of inspiration. Inspiration because they didn’t feel bound by it. . Another influence of developing of Common Law is
Of course, they were also probably influence by Normand law as most of them they were closely related to the king and therefore often of Normand origin. The role of judges managed to set up a fairly system that finally prevailed other customs and so created a body of law which will be common to the all kingdom. This was impossible through these royal judges. Common Law today is considered as being characteristic of the British identity. But in fact, this identity was born of a body of law by French jurist.
It continues to be a significantamends of law that exists without a statutory definition. Murder was defined in the 18th century on the Common Law. Even if the punishment today is statutory law, the origin is from the Common Law. This body of law is still important.