The Evolution of a Nation

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Berkowitz ◽  
Karen B. Clay
Keyword(s):  
Political Competition ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
Colonial History ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Water Transportation ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Access To Water ◽  
Late Twentieth

Although political and legal institutions are essential to any nation's economic development, the forces that have shaped these institutions are poorly understood. Drawing on rich evidence about the development of the American states from the mid-nineteenth to the late twentieth century, this book documents the mechanisms through which geographical and historical conditions—such as climate, access to water transportation, and early legal systems—impacted political and judicial institutions and economic growth. The book shows how a state's geography and climate influenced whether elites based their wealth in agriculture or trade. States with more occupationally diverse elites in 1860 had greater levels of political competition in their legislature from 1866 to 2000. The book also examines the effects of early legal systems. Because of their colonial history, thirteen states had an operational civil-law legal system prior to statehood. All of these states except Louisiana would later adopt common law. By the late eighteenth century, the two legal systems differed in their balances of power. In civil-law systems, judiciaries were subordinate to legislatures, whereas in common-law systems, the two were more equal. Former civil-law states and common-law states exhibit persistent differences in the structure of their courts, the retention of judges, and judicial budgets. Moreover, changes in court structures, retention procedures, and budgets occur under very different conditions in civil-law and common-law states. This book illustrates how initial geographical and historical conditions can determine the evolution of political and legal institutions and long-run growth.

FIDUCIARY OWNERSHIP AND TRUSTS IN A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 901-933
Author(s):  
Daniel Clarry
Keyword(s):  
Essential Feature ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Legal Traditions ◽  
Trust Property

AbstractOwnership is an essential feature of trusts that serves as a useful analytical and comparative tool in order to cross legal traditions and compare different legal institutions, which to a greater or lesser extent serve similar socio-economic and legal functions. The concentration on ownership enables one to burrow down into the normative roots of different legal traditions. This article comprises three substantive parts: first, characterizing ownership and the manner in which this concept distinguishes the civil and common law traditions; second, contextualizing ownership in relation to trusts from different legal systems; and, third, conceptualizing some contemporary challenges arising out of the divergent nature of ownership in the phenomenology of the trust paradigm, the value of the trust to comparative law and its effect on the civil law as a distinct tradition. It is argued that trusts necessarily involve the fiduciary administration of property and that ‘fiduciary ownership’ is a better shorthand description of the encumbered nature of trust property, rather than ‘dual’ or ‘split’ ownership, which is misleading and mistaken.

scholarly journals The Transplant of Trusts in Different Legal Jurisdictions: The Example of China

Global Jurist ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giulia Terranova
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Original Model ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Trust Law

AbstractLegal transplants are considered a significant factor in the evolution of legal systems. One example of transplant of a legal institution through its prestige is the diffusion of the trust from the English legal system to other common law systems and to many civil law countries. One of these is China that in 2001 enacted the Trust Law of the People’s Republic of China. This paper wants to analyse the trust under the Trust Law and to compare it with the original model in the English legal system, understanding how far or how close it is from the original one.

The Experiences of Civil Lawyers When Studying the Common Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Margaret Fordham
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Common

AbstractThis article examines the issues experienced by civil lawyers when studying the common law. It considers the extent of the differences between common law and civil law legal systems, examines the challenges which students from civil law jurisdictions face when first exposed to the common law, analyses the various ways in which these challenges may be met, and summarises civilians’ overall impressions of the common law.

Covering Blood and Graves

2018 ◽  
pp. 213-237
Author(s):  
Nancy O. Gallman ◽  
Alan Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Spanish Law ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Spanish Florida ◽  
The Face ◽  
English Law ◽  
Corporate Autonomy

Gallman and Taylor take up murder at the boundary zones between the Iroquois and British settlers and between Spanish Florida and the Lower Creeks and Seminoles. Despite contrasts between the legal systems of the empires—civil law and inquisitorial procedure on the Spanish side, common law and trial by jury on the British side—indigenous groups came to similar conclusions regarding murder. Specifically, Native leaders rejected execution of the guilty, as proposed by English law, or other punishments, from execution to imprisonment to exile, under Spanish law. They opted instead to resolve matters by “covering the grave,” or giving gifts by the culpable party to the aggrieved party in lieu of revenge. This practice was less likely to spark a blood feud and enabled indigenous groups to preserve corporate autonomy in the face of pressures to conform to imperial norms. Though reluctantly, imperial officials often went along with this in order to keep the peace.

2. Legal systems and sources of law

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-70
Author(s):  
Scott Slorach ◽  
Judith Embley ◽  
Peter Goodchild ◽  
Catherine Shephard
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Potential Effect ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
The World ◽  
The Status

This chapter focuses on the sources of law in England & Wales, and is organised as follows. Section 2.1 describes the key jurisdictions relevant to lawyers in England and Wales. Section 2.2 deals with the issue of where the law comes from: sources of law. Section 2.3 reviews the development of the two ‘traditional’ sources of law in England and Wales: case law and statutes. Sections 2.4 and 2.5 consider the status and operation of EU and international law, including the potential effect of Brexit. Section 2.7 goes on to discuss public and private law, common law, and civil law, and other classifications used by lawyers. This is followed by a discussion of legal systems and their cultures across the world.

The Creation and Expansion of the International Criminal Court: A Legal Explanation

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Justyna Powell ◽  
Sara McLaughlin Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
State Level ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
International Courts ◽  
The Creation

International courts have proliferated in the international system in the past century, with one hundred judicial or quasi-judicial bodies currently in existence. While the supply of international courts has increased substantially, state level support for international courts varies across states, across courts, and over time. This paper focuses on the cross-sectional and temporal variation in state level support for a particular court, the International Criminal Court (ICC). The authors argue that domestic legal systems create different predispositions with respect to states’ willingness to join adjudicatory bodies and the design of their commitments to international courts. Negotiators involved in the creation of the ICC pushed for rules and procedures that mimicked those of their domestic legal systems to help reduce uncertainty regarding the court’s future behavior and decision-making processes. This interesting process of legal bargaining led to the creation of a sui generis court, one which represents a mixture of common law and civil law systems. The hybrid nature of the court’s design enhanced the attractiveness of the court to civil and common law states, making them significantly more likely to sign and ratify the Rome Statute. Empirical models demonstrate that common and civil law states were fervent supporters of the ICC in preliminary negotiations and that they have shown higher levels of support for the Court since the ICC’s inception in comparison to Islamic law or mixed law states.

scholarly journals Comparative Study of Civil Procedure in Common Law and Civil Law Systems

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Nader Ghanbari ◽  
Hassan Mohseni ◽  
Dawood Nassiran
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Specific Method ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Separate Branch ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Comparative Study

Comparing the legal systems is a specific method in which due to its important function is considered as a separate branch in law. None of the branches in law can place its knowledge merely on ideas and findings within the national borders. Several basic objections have been given regarding the definition and purpose of comparative study in civil procedure. In addition there are specific problems regarding studying practically the similar systems in a legal system like differences in purpose, definition and concept. In different legal systems like civil law and common law systems in which there is a divergence, even the judicial system`s organs and judges` appointment and judicial formalism are different, which add to the problems of the comparative study. Reviewing these differences could lead to a better understanding of these legal systems and recognizing the common principles in making use of each other`s findings considering these differences and indicate the obstacles of comparative study in this regard.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document