Discussion – Civil Law vs. Common Law
The primary feature of a civil law system is that the law is codified and written into a collection and not determined by judges. On the other hand, common law is a legal system where the law is determined by judges overtime on a case-to-case basis (Walker & Chase, 2010). Both common and civil law have shown signs of collapsing in the future. In civil law, there are rules that were developed in a different era, which have to undergo reform, making it necessary for judiciaries to practice common law. In common law, there are many precedents that have been outdated, calling for reforms that might change how judges make decisions in the future. Hire our assignment writing services in case your assignment is devastating you.
The concept of stare decisis, commonly known as precedents, is a legal requirement for courts to refer to past and similar issues related to current cases in making decisions. This concept is a disadvantage to the common law as it makes it rigid and complex (Walker & Chase, 2010). It is hard to change a precedent. Changing past decisions would require a long process involving the highest court of the country. This upholds some illogical decisions that have been made in the past and continues to affect decisions in the present.
Reference
Walker, J., & Chase, O. G. (2010). Common law, civil law and the future of categories. LexisNexis Canada.
