Chapter 15. ‘Compensation’ and ‘Indemnity’ under the Agency Regulations: How the Common Law System Copes with the Invasion of Civilian Concepts

2007 ◽  
pp. 311-337
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Law System

Common Law Constitutionalism

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
William E. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Profession ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Law System

This chapter shows how common law pleading, the use of common law vocabulary, and substantive common law rules lay at the foundation of every colony’s law by the middle of the eighteenth century. There is some explanation of how this common law system functioned in practice. The chapter then discusses why colonials looked upon the common law as a repository of liberty. It also discusses in detail the development of the legal profession individually in each of the thirteen colonies. Finally, the chapter ends with a discussion of the role of legislation. It shows that, although legislation had played an important role in the development of law and legal institutions in the seventeenth century, eighteenth-century Americans were suspicious of legislation, with the result that the output of pre-Revolutionary legislatures was minimal.

British Virgin Islands

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arabella di Iorio
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Virgin Islands ◽  
British Virgin Islands ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Eastern Caribbean ◽  
Common Law System ◽  
Trust Law

The legal system of the British Virgin Islands is a common law system based on the English model, comprising statute law and binding case precedents. The principles of English common law and equity apply in the BVI (subject to modification by BVI statutes) pursuant to the Common Law (Declaration of Application) Act (Cap 13) and the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Virgin Islands) Act (Cap 80) respectively. The general principles of trust law are based on English law.

RELATIVITY OF TITLE AT LAW AND IN EQUITY

2006 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 330-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Fox
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Fundamental Feature ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Law System ◽  
Property Holding

THE relativity of titles to land is a fundamental feature of property holding in the common law system. It is treated as one of the features that distinguishes it from civilian systems of property holding and proves the pragmatic stuff from which the common law is made.

scholarly journals The Conceptual Analysis of the Doctrine of Proportionality and, its Role in Democratic Constitutionalism; A Case Study of UK

sjesr ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-210
Author(s):  
Dr. Syed Raza Shah Gilani ◽  
Hidayat Ur Rehman ◽  
Dr. Ilyas Khan
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Law System ◽  
The People ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Law System ◽  
Democratic Norms

For the last few decades, the doctrine of proportionality has demonstrated and corroborated that it is the most effective legal standard used around Europe for the adjudication of constitutional rights. From its German origins, proportionality has migrated across jurisdictions and areas of law and has become one of the most successful legal transplants. However, there is some confusion as to whether there is any justification for the intervention of this in the UK's legal system, as the UK's legal system is based on common law, and did not welcome this doctrine very much. Therefore, it is essential to analyze the basic principles of this doctrine and check its compatibility with the common law system, which is based on democratic norms. To test the similarity, this article would also reflect on the underlying characteristics of the theory of proportionality and equate it with the standards of a democratic society. To begin with, this article first endeavors to analyze the legal sources of the doctrine of proportionality and then examines its affinity with the democratic norms of the common law system to investigate the compatibility level with each other in protecting the constitutional rights of the people.

Judicial Review of Decisions

2019 ◽  
pp. 145-164
Author(s):  
John Baker
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Present System ◽  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Face ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Law System

This chapter is concerned with the history of mechanisms for reviewing judicial and administrative decisions. It begins with the writ of error, which was confined to errors on the face of the record of a court of record and therefore not an appeal as now understood. But informal methods were developed for reserving points to be discussed by all the judges of England, usually in the Exchequer Chamber or Serjeants’ Inn. Appeals in a wider sense began in Chancery and were not brought into the common-law system till 1875. The ‘prerogative writs’ of prohibition, habeas corpus, certiorari, and mandamus, enabled the King’s Bench to review inferior jurisdictions and also the exercise of power by officials and ministers. It is explained how this grew into the present system of administrative law. There is also a brief account of the rise of tribunals, and how their decisions came to be reviewable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document