Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rule 4
Rule 4
Iustitia ("Lady Justice") is a symbolic personification of the coercive power of a tribunal: a sword representing
state authority, scales representing an objective standard and a blindfold indicating that justice should be
impartial.[1]
1Philosophy of law
o 1.1Analytical jurisprudence
o 1.2Connection to morality and justice
2History
3Legal systems
o 3.1Civil law
3.1.1Anarchist law
3.1.2Socialist law
o 3.2Common law and equity
o 3.3Religious law
3.3.1Canon law
3.3.2Sharia law
4Legal methods
5Legal institutions
o 5.1Judiciary
o 5.2Legislature
o 5.3Executive
o 5.4Military and police
o 5.5Bureaucracy
o 5.6Legal profession
o 5.7Civil society
6Areas of law
o 6.1International law
o 6.2Constitutional and administrative law
o 6.3Criminal law
o 6.4Contract law
o 6.5Torts and delicts
o 6.6Property law
o 6.7Equity and trusts
o 6.8Further disciplines
7Intersection with other fields
o 7.1Economics
o 7.2Sociology
8See also
9References
o 9.1Citations
o 9.2Sources
10External links
Philosophy of law
Main articles: Jurisprudence and Philosophy of law
But what, after all, is a law? [...] When I say that the object of laws is always general, I mean that law considers subjects en masse
and actions in the abstract, and never a particular person or action. [...] On this view, we at once see that it can no longer be asked
whose business it is to make laws, since they are acts of the general will; nor whether the prince is above the law, since he is a
member of the State; nor whether the law can be unjust, since no one is unjust to himself; nor how we can be both free and
subject to the laws, since they are but registers of our wills.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract, II, 6.[29]
The philosophy of law is commonly known as jurisprudence. Normative jurisprudence asks "what
should law be?", while analytic jurisprudence asks "what is law?"
Analytical jurisprudence
Main article: Analytical jurisprudence
There have been several attempts to produce "a universally acceptable definition of law". In
1972, Baron Hampstead suggested that no such definition could be produced. [30] McCoubrey and
White said that the question "what is law?" has no simple answer. [31] Glanville Williams said that the
meaning of the word "law" depends on the context in which that word is used. He said that, for
example, "early customary law" and "municipal law" were contexts where the word "law" had two
different and irreconcilable meanings.[32] Thurman Arnold said that it is obvious that it is impossible to
define the word "law" and that it is also equally obvious that the struggle to define that word should
not ever be abandoned.[33] It is possible to take the view that there is no need to define the word "law"
(e.g. "let's forget about generalities and get down to cases").[34]
One definition is that law is a system of rules and guidelines which are enforced through social
institutions to govern behaviour.[2] In The Concept of Law Hart argued law is a "system of rules";
[35]
Austin said law was "the command of a sovereign, backed by the threat of a sanction"; [36] Dworkin
describes law as an "interpretive concept" to achieve justice in his text titled Law's Empire;[37] and
Raz argues law is an "authority" to mediate people's interests. [38] Holmes said, "The prophecies of
what the courts will do in fact, and nothing more pretentious, are what I mean by the law." [39] In
his Treatise on Law Aquinas argues that law is a rational ordering of things which concern the
common good that is promulgated by whoever is charged with the care of the community. [40] This
definition has both positivist and naturalist elements.[41]
Bentham's utilitarian theories remained dominant in law until the 20th century.
Later in the 20th century, H. L. A. Hart attacked Austin for his simplifications and Kelsen for his
fictions in The Concept of Law.[54] Hart argued law is a system of rules, divided into primary (rules of
conduct) and secondary ones (rules addressed to officials to administer primary rules). Secondary
rules are further divided into rules of adjudication (to resolve legal disputes), rules of change
(allowing laws to be varied) and the rule of recognition (allowing laws to be identified as valid). Two
of Hart's students continued the debate: In his book Law's Empire, Ronald Dworkin attacked Hart
and the positivists for their refusal to treat law as a moral issue. Dworkin argues that law is an
"interpretive concept",[37] that requires judges to find the best fitting and most just solution to a legal
dispute, given their constitutional traditions. Joseph Raz, on the other hand, defended the positivist
outlook and criticised Hart's "soft social thesis" approach in The Authority of Law.[38] Raz argues that
law is authority, identifiable purely through social sources and without reference to moral reasoning.
In his view, any categorisation of rules beyond their role as authoritative instruments in mediation are
best left to sociology, rather than jurisprudence.[55]
History
Main article: Legal history
King Hammurabi is revealed the code of laws by the Mesopotamian sun god Shamash, also revered as the god
of justice.
The history of law links closely to the development of civilization. Ancient Egyptian law, dating as far
back as 3000 BC, was based on the concept of Ma'at and characterised by
tradition, rhetorical speech, social equality and impartiality. [56][57][58] By the 22nd century BC, the
ancient Sumerian ruler Ur-Nammu had formulated the first law code, which consisted
of casuistic statements ("if … then ..."). Around 1760 BC, King Hammurabi further
developed Babylonian law, by codifying and inscribing it in stone. Hammurabi placed several copies
of his law code throughout the kingdom of Babylon as stelae, for the entire public to see; this
became known as the Codex Hammurabi. The most intact copy of these stelae was discovered in
the 19th century by British Assyriologists, and has since been fully transliterated and translated into
various languages, including English, Italian, German, and French. [59]
The Old Testament dates back to 1280 BC and takes the form of moral imperatives as
recommendations for a good society. The small Greek city-state, ancient Athens, from about the 8th
century BC was the first society to be based on broad inclusion of its citizenry, excluding women and
the slave class. However, Athens had no legal science or single word for "law", [60] relying instead on
the three-way distinction between divine law (thémis), human decree (nomos) and custom (díkē).
Yet Ancient Greek law contained major constitutional innovations in the development
[61]
of democracy.[62]
Roman law was heavily influenced by Greek philosophy, but its detailed rules were developed by
professional jurists and were highly sophisticated. [63][64] Over the centuries between the rise and
decline of the Roman Empire, law was adapted to cope with the changing social situations and
underwent major codification under Theodosius II and Justinian I.[65] Although codes were replaced
by custom and case law during the Early Middle Ages, Roman law was rediscovered around the
11th century when medieval legal scholars began to research Roman codes and adapt their
concepts to the canon law, giving birth to the jus commune. Latin legal maxims (called brocards)
were compiled for guidance. In medieval England, royal courts developed a body of precedent which
later became the common law. A Europe-wide Law Merchant was formed so that merchants could
trade with common standards of practice rather than with the many splintered facets of local laws.
The Law Merchant, a precursor to modern commercial law, emphasised the freedom to contract and
alienability of property.[66] As nationalism grew in the 18th and 19th centuries, the Law Merchant was
incorporated into countries' local law under new civil codes. The Napoleonic and German Codes
became the most influential. In contrast to English common law, which consists of enormous tomes
of case law, codes in small books are easy to export and easy for judges to apply. However, today
there are signs that civil and common law are converging. [67] EU law is codified in treaties, but
develops through de facto precedent laid down by the European Court of Justice.[68]
The Constitution of India is the longest written constitution for a country, containing 444 articles, 12 schedules,
numerous amendments and 117,369 words.
Legal systems
Main articles: Comparative law, List of national legal systems, and Comparative legal history
Colour-coded map of the legal systems around the world, showing civil, common law, religious, customary and
mixed legal systems.[80] Common law systems are shaded pink, and civil law systems are shaded
blue/turquoise.
In general, legal systems can be split between civil law and common law systems. [81] Modern
scholars argue that the significance of this distinction has progressively declined; the numerous legal
transplants, typical of modern law, result in the sharing by modern legal systems of many features
traditionally considered typical of either common law or civil law.[67][82] The term "civil law", referring to
the civilian legal system originating in continental Europe, should not be confused with "civil law" in
the sense of the common law topics distinct from criminal law and public law.
The third type of legal system—accepted by some countries without separation of church and state
—is religious law, based on scriptures. The specific system that a country is ruled by is often
determined by its history, connections with other countries, or its adherence to international
standards. The sources that jurisdictions adopt as authoritatively binding are the defining features of
any legal system. Yet classification is a matter of form rather than substance since similar rules often
prevail.
Civil law
Main article: Civil law (legal system)
Emperor Justinian (527–565) of the Byzantine Empire who ordered the codification of Corpus Juris Civilis.
Civil law is the legal system used in most countries around the world today. In civil law the sources
recognised as authoritative are, primarily, legislation—especially codifications in constitutions
or statutes passed by government—and custom.[83] Codifications date back millennia, with one early
example being the Babylonian Codex Hammurabi. Modern civil law systems essentially derive from
legal codes issued by Byzantine Emperor Justinian I in the 6th century, which were rediscovered by
11th century Italy.[84] Roman law in the days of the Roman Republic and Empire was heavily
procedural, and lacked a professional legal class.[85] Instead a lay magistrate, iudex, was chosen to
adjudicate. Decisions were not published in any systematic way, so any case law that developed
was disguised and almost unrecognised. [86] Each case was to be decided afresh from the laws of the
State, which mirrors the (theoretical) unimportance of judges' decisions for future cases in civil law
systems today. From 529 to 534 AD the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I codified and consolidated
Roman law up until that point, so that what remained was one-twentieth of the mass of legal texts
from before.[87] This became known as the Corpus Juris Civilis. As one legal historian wrote,
"Justinian consciously looked back to the golden age of Roman law and aimed to restore it to the
peak it had reached three centuries before."[88] The Justinian Code remained in force in the East until
the fall of the Byzantine Empire. Western Europe, meanwhile, relied on a mix of the Theodosian
Code and Germanic customary law until the Justinian Code was rediscovered in the 11th century,
and scholars at the University of Bologna used it to interpret their own laws.[89] Civil law codifications
based closely on Roman law, alongside some influences from religious laws such as canon law,
continued to spread throughout Europe until the Enlightenment; then, in the 19th century, both
France, with the Code Civil, and Germany, with the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, modernised their legal
codes. Both these codes influenced heavily not only the law systems of the countries in continental
Europe (e.g. Greece), but also the Japanese and Korean legal traditions.[90][91] Today, countries that
have civil law systems range from Russia] and Turkey to most of Central and Latin America.[92]
Anarchist law
Main article: Anarchist law
Anarchism has been practiced in society in much of the world. Mass anarchist communities, ranging
from Syria to the United States, exist and vary from hundreds to millions. Anarchism encompasses a
broad range of social political philosophies with different tendencies and implementation.
Anarchist law primarily deals with how anarchism is implemented upon a society, the framework
based on decentralized organizations and mutual aid, with representation through a form of direct
democracy. Laws being based upon their need.[93] A large portion of anarchist ideologies such
as anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism primarily focuses on decentralized worker
unions, cooperatives and syndicates as the main instrument of society.[94]
Socialist law
Main article: Socialist law
Socialist law is the legal systems in communist states such as the former Soviet Union and
the People's Republic of China.[95] Academic opinion is divided on whether it is a separate system
from civil law, given major deviations based on Marxist–Leninist ideology, such as subordinating the
judiciary to the executive ruling party.[95][96][97]
In common law legal systems, decisions by courts are explicitly acknowledged as "law" on equal
footing with statutes adopted through the legislative process and with regulations issued by
the executive branch. The "doctrine of precedent", or stare decisis (Latin for "to stand by decisions")
means that decisions by higher courts bind lower courts, and future decisions of the same court, to
assure that similar cases reach similar results. In contrast, in "civil law" systems, legislative statutes
are typically more detailed, and judicial decisions are shorter and less detailed, because the judge or
barrister is only writing to decide the single case, rather than to set out reasoning that will guide
future courts.
Common law originated from England and has been inherited by almost every country once tied to
the British Empire (except Malta, Scotland, the U.S. state of Louisiana, and the Canadian province
of Quebec). In medieval England, the Norman conquest the law varied-shire-to-shire, based on
disparate tribal customs. The concept of a "common law" developed during the reign of Henry
II during the late 12th century, when Henry appointed judges that had authority to create an
institutionalised and unified system of law "common" to the country. The next major step in the
evolution of the common law came when King John was forced by his barons to sign a document
limiting his authority to pass laws. This "great charter" or Magna Carta of 1215 also required that the
King's entourage of judges hold their courts and judgments at "a certain place" rather than
dispensing autocratic justice in unpredictable places about the country. [98] A concentrated and elite
group of judges acquired a dominant role in law-making under this system, and compared to its
European counterparts the English judiciary became highly centralised. In 1297, for instance, while
the highest court in France had fifty-one judges, the English Court of Common Pleas had five.[99] This
powerful and tight-knit judiciary gave rise to a systematised process of developing common law. [100]
However, the system became overly systematised—overly rigid and inflexible. As a result, as time
went on, increasing numbers of citizens petitioned the King to override the common law, and on the
King's behalf the Lord Chancellor gave judgment to do what was equitable in a case. From the time
of Sir Thomas More, the first lawyer to be appointed as Lord Chancellor, a systematic body of equity
grew up alongside the rigid common law, and developed its own Court of Chancery. At first, equity
was often criticised as erratic, that it varied according to the length of the Chancellor's foot. [101] Over
time, courts of equity developed solid principles, especially under Lord Eldon.[102] In the 19th century
in England, and in 1937 in the U.S., the two systems were merged.
In developing the common law, academic writings have always played an important part, both to
collect overarching principles from dispersed case law, and to argue for change. William Blackstone,
from around 1760, was the first scholar to collect, describe, and teach the common law. [103] But
merely in describing, scholars who sought explanations and underlying structures slowly changed
the way the law actually worked.[104]
Religious law
Main article: Religious law
Religious law is explicitly based on religious precepts. Examples include the Jewish Halakha and
Islamic Sharia—both of which translate as the "path to follow"—while Christian canon law also
survives in some church communities. Often the implication of religion for law is unalterability,
because the word of God cannot be amended or legislated against by judges or governments.
[105]
However, a thorough and detailed legal system generally requires human elaboration. For
instance, the Quran has some law, and it acts as a source of further law through interpretation,
[106]
Qiyas (reasoning by analogy), Ijma (consensus) and precedent. This is mainly contained in a
body of law and jurisprudence known as Sharia and Fiqh respectively. Another example is
the Torah or Old Testament, in the Pentateuch or Five Books of Moses. This contains the basic code
of Jewish law, which some Israeli communities choose to use. The Halakha is a code of Jewish law
that summarizes some of the Talmud's interpretations. Nevertheless, Israeli law allows litigants to
use religious laws only if they choose. Canon law is only in use by members of the Catholic Church,
the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Anglican Communion.
Canon law
Main article: Canon law
The Corpus Juris Canonici, the fundamental collection of canon law for over 750 years.
A trial in the Ottoman Empire, 1879, when religious law applied under the Mecelle
Until the 18th century, Sharia law was practiced throughout the Muslim world in a non-codified form,
with the Ottoman Empire's Mecelle code in the 19th century being a first attempt
at codifying elements of Sharia law. Since the mid-1940s, efforts have been made, in country after
country, to bring Sharia law more into line with modern conditions and conceptions. [114][115] In modern
times, the legal systems of many Muslim countries draw upon both civil and common law traditions
as well as Islamic law and custom. The constitutions of certain Muslim states, such as Egypt and
Afghanistan, recognise Islam as the religion of the state, obliging legislature to adhere to Sharia.
[116]
Saudi Arabia recognises Quran as its constitution, and is governed on the basis of Islamic law.
[117]
Iran has also witnessed a reiteration of Islamic law into its legal system after 1979. [118] During the
last few decades, one of the fundamental features of the movement of Islamic resurgence has been
the call to restore the Sharia, which has generated a vast amount of literature and affected world
politics.[119]
Legal methods
There are distinguished methods of legal reasoning (applying the law) and methods of interpreting
(construing) the law. The former are legal syllogism, which holds sway in civil law legal
systems, analogy, which is present in common law legal systems, especially in the US, and
argumentative theories that occur in both systems. The latter are different rules (directives) of legal
interpretation such as directives of linguistic interpretation, teleological interpretation or systemic
interpretation as well as more specific rules, for instance, golden rule or mischief rule. There are also
many other arguments and cannons of interpretation which altogether make statutory
interpretation possible.
Law professor and former United States Attorney General Edward H. Levi noted that the "basic
pattern of legal reasoning is reasoning by example" - that is, reasoning by comparing outcomes in
cases resolving similar legal questions.[120] In a U.S. Supreme Court case regarding procedural efforts
taken by a debt collection company to avoid errors, Justice Sotomayor cautioned that "legal
reasoning is not a mechanical or strictly linear process".[121]
Jurimetrics is the formal application of quantitative methods, especially probability and statistics, to
legal questions. The use of statistical methods in court cases and law review articles has grown
massively in importance in the last few decades. [122][123]
Legal institutions
It is a real unity of them all in one and the same person, made by covenant of every man with every man, in such manner as if
every man should say to every man: I authorise and give up my right of governing myself to this man, or to this assembly of men,
on this condition; that thou givest up, thy right to him, and authorise all his actions in like manner.
Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, XVII
Judiciary
Main article: Judiciary
A judiciary is a number of judges mediating disputes to determine outcome. Most countries have
systems of appeal courts, with an apex court as the ultimate judicial authority. In the United States,
this authority is the Supreme Court;[127] in Australia, the High Court; in the UK, the Supreme Court;
[128]
in Germany, the Bundesverfassungsgericht; and in France, the Cour de Cassation.[129][130] For most
European countries the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg can overrule national law, when
EU law is relevant. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg allows citizens of
the Council of Europe member states to bring cases relating to human rights issues before it. [131]