Comparison of Civil Law and Common Law in Australia and Surrounding Countries
Abstract
This study aims to determine the legal system can be interpreted in two ways. First, the legal system is defined as a unit of components or elements (sub-systems) as follows: material law-formal law and civil law-public law. Included in this view are those who see the legal system as a unity between various laws and regulations with legal principles. Second, the legal system is defined as a unity of components: legal structure, legal substance, and legal culture. Eric L Richard, an expert in global business law, divides the main legal systems into six legal families: Civil law, Common law, Islamic law, Socialist law, Sub Sahara Africa, and Far east. This research is a qualitative research with a historical juridical approach that describes the legal history of how civil law and common law apply in various countries. By collecting data in the library supported by primary and secondary data according to the chosen topic. In general, based on how law is produced and implemented, there are two legal systems known in the world, namely, civil law and common law. The two legal systems have their own history and differences.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Canivet, Guy. 2003. The Interrelationship Between Common Law and Civil Law, Louisiana Law Review, Volume 63, Number 4, Summer 2003, p 937- 944.
Centre for Social Research and Scottish Centre for Social Research, Manchester: Spring 2010. ISBN 978 1 84206 266 1, p.29.
Coleman, Jules L. 2001. The Practice Of Principle 206-07 (2001); JOSEPH RAZ, The Rule of Law and its Virtue, in The Authority Of Law 210, 213
Dahan, Yossi., Lerner, Hanna and Sivan, Faina Milman. 2013. Shared Responsibility and the International Labour Organization, Michigan Journal of International Law, Volume 34, Issue 4, 34 Mich.J. Int'l L. 675
Dainow, Joseph. 1966-1967. The Civil Law And The Common Law: Some Points Of Comparison. The American Journal Of Comparative Law, Vol. 15, No. 3, p. 419-435.
Dworkin, Ronald, 1981a, “What is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Welfare,â€Philosophy and Public Affairs 10, pp. 185-246, reprinted in: R. Dworkin, Sovereign Virtue. The Theory and Practice of Equality, Cambridge: Harvard University Press 2000, p.11-64.
Gribnau, H. 2010. Equality, Legal Certainty and Tax Legislation in the Netherlands – Fundamental Legal Principles as Checks on Legislative Power: A Case Study.
Howe, John. 2010. Centre for Employment and Labour Relations Law The University of Melbourne, The Broad Idea Of Labour Law: Industrial Policy, Labour Market Regulation And Decent Work, Working Paper No. 49 November 2010, Center for Employment and Labor Relation Law, Melbourne Law School, ISSN1321-9235.
J. J. Burgers & Valderrama, Monsquera I. J. 2010. Fairness: A Dire International Tax Standard with No Meaning?, p. 770.
Jones, Naomi., Bromley, Catherine., Creegan, Chris., Kinsella, Rachel., Dobbie, Fiona and Ormston, Rachel. 2010. with Alison Park and Miranda Phillips, Building understanding of fairness, equality and good relations, Equality and Human Rights Commission Research report 53, National, p.263
Meyers, Chris. 2004. Wrongful Beneficence: Exploitation and Third World Sweatshops, 35 J. SOC. PHIL. 319, 319 (2004).
Michelman, Frank. 2007. Constitutional Authorship, Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations, supra note 4, at 64.
Orucu, Esin. 2008. What is a Mixed Legal System: Exclusion or Expansionâ€, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Vol.12, No.1,May 2008, p. 2.
Pagano, Marco, and Paolo Volpin, The Political Economy of Corporate Governance, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 2682, 2001.
Roe, Mark, Political Preconditions to Separating Ownership from Corporate Control, Stanford Law Review, LIII (2000), 539–606.
Shapiro, Scott J. 2001. On Hart's Way Out, in HART'S POSTSCRIPT 149, 153 (Jules Coleman ed., 2001).
Tetley, William. 2000. Mixed Jurisdictions: Common Law v. Civil Law (Codified and Uncodified). Louisiana Law Review. Volume 60 Number 3, Spring
Van Jaarsveld, Fourie and Olivier, Principles and Practice of Labour Law (2004) par 51. (Van Jaarsveld, Fourie and Olivier Principles.)
Waldron, Jeremy. 2011. Planning for Legality, Michigan Law Review, Volume 169, Issue 6, Article 3, 2011, New York University School of Law., p.265
Watsons, Alan. 2009. Comparative Law and Legal Change. The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2009, p. 313-336
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/jdh.v5i3.24389
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
View My Stats
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Daulat Hukum has been indexed in:
