Royal Writs in England from the Conquest to Glanvill: Studies in the Early History of the Common Law

1960 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 386
Author(s):  
C. R. Niehaus ◽  
R. C. van Caenegem
2019 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Thomas J. McSweeney

A central question in the early history of the common law is how much influence Roman and canon law exerted over the common law in its first century. The debates over Roman- and canon-law influence have largely stalled, however. This chapter introduces a new way forward in those debates. Most scholars who have looked for Roman- and canon-law influence on the common law have looked for similarities in particular rules and have argued that common lawyers adopted those rules from Roman or canon law. Priests of the Law argues that we are more likely to find borrowings in the context of more fundamental questions. The early thirteenth century was a time before the common law was the common law. There was debate over its nature and who should control it. In their attempts to answer these questions, the authors of Bracton turned to Roman and canon law.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 513-556
Author(s):  
Joseph Biancalana

The writs of entry are of interest chiefly because they offer an example of how, in the first century of its history, the common law grew by the creation of new writs. The first writs of entry were among the earliest writs to be invented after the legal reforms of Henry II. Further writs of entry were created after 1217. The distinctive feature of a writ of entry was that it challenged what plaintiff thought was the basis of defendant's claim to the land in dispute. A writ of entry alleged that defendant “had no entry” into the land other than by a transaction or taking that did not authorize him to hold the land.


1977 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 373
Author(s):  
J. L. Barton ◽  
A. W. B. Simpson ◽  
S. J. Stoljar
Keyword(s):  

1971 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. H. Baker

Slade's Case is of such significance in the history of the common law that it has, quite properly, been the subject of more scrutiny and discussion in recent years than any other case of the same age. The foundation of all this discussion has been Coke's report, which is the only full report in print. The accuracy and completeness of Coke's version have hardly been challenged, and the discussions have assumed that it contains almost all there is to know about the case. This assumption must be discarded if we are to understand the contemporary significance of the case.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document