Topic 1: The English legal system
Absence of legal code
In most European countries the law has been codified. This means that the whole of the law on a particular
subject, for example the law of property, can be found in one document or code
While some of these codes just provide a framework for the law, others attempt to provide a complete
statement of it
In English law, the bulk of it has been made by judges in individual cases. Rules of law made by senior
judges must be followed in later cases. In the majority of cases brought up in an English court, a lawyer who is
trying to establish a legal principle will cite earlier cases to prove that the principle exists and that it should be
applied in the current case. This is common law which has been shaped by caselaw
The law making role of the judges
In most European countries the judges interpret the legal code. In doing this they do not deliberately set out to
create law
Judicial precedent
English courts are arranged in a hierarchical structure, and that courts lower down the hierarchy must follow
the previous decisions of the courts higher up. Senior English judges therefore have a dual role, they interpret
the existing law and create the law by making legal principles which courts lower down must follow
Absence of Roman law
The Romans occupied England from 55 BC to 430 AD. Roman law was extremely sophisticated by the
standards of its day. The other European countries which were part of the Roman Empire have retained
elements of Roman Law, but English law has almost no direct Roman law influence
The adversarial system of trial
Adversarial — involved or characterized by conflict or opposition
It is an important feature of the English legal system
The English system of trial is adversarial. This means that the lawyers on either side are adversaries who
“fight” each other in trying to win judgement for their client
The judge supervises the battle between the lawyers, but does not take part
One party’s lawyers try to establish that there is a case, the other party’s lawyers deny this by whatever means
possible
1
,Most other countries have an inquisitorial system of criminal procedure where the judge is the inquisitor,
determined to discover the truth
An important aspect of the adversarial system is that it is the task of lawyers to bring the relevant legal rules to
the attention of the court. He must always quote the statue that made the law that he is bringing up
At all levels, a statement of law with no authority provided to back it up is not regarded highly
Commonwealth and former commonwealth countries such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada have
retained the adversarial system of trial and most other features of the English legal system. In the US trials are
adversarial and some features of the English legal system have also been retained
Classification of English law
English law can be classified in three main ways
1. Public law or private law
2. Common law or equity
3. Civil law or criminal law
Public law and private law
Public law — law that is concerned with decisions made by governmental bodies
Criminal law is regarded as public law as citizens are prosecuted by the state
Private law — law that describes disputes between private individual citizens
Private law is also called civil law, and can be broadly broken down into 5 main areas: contract, tort,
property, trust, and family law.
Common law and equity
The term common law is used in three distinct senses
1. It is used to distinguish countries which have adopted features of the English legal system from those
countries which have not. Countries which have adopted the central European system are said to have
a civil law system
2. It denotes that body of law that is made by the judges in the King’s (or Queen’s) courts, rather than the
body of law made by judges in the courts of equity
3. Common law means judge-made law as distinct from statute law
It is unfortunate that the term is used in three different ways, however the context in which we use the
term will make sense depending on the context
Civil law vs criminal law
Civil law Criminal law
2
, Purpose Civil courts are designed to compensate Criminal courts are designed to punish people who
people who have been caused loss or have committed criminal offenses
injury by the wrongful acts of other people
Public vs Regarded as private law Regarded as public law as citizens are prosecuted
private law by the state (usually in the name of the Queen)
Parties The claimant which sues the defendant The state which prosecutes the defendant
involved
The outcome The claimant either wins the case or loses The defendant is either convicted or acquitted
The If the claimant wins he will be awarded a If the defendant is convicted they will be awarded a
consequences remedy sentence
Examples Negligence, trespass, breach of contract, Murder, theft, committing unfair trade practices,
disputes as to ownership of property failure to observe health and safety provisions
Other differences include:
● Terminology used
● Courts involved
● Balance of probability vs beyond reasonable doubt
○ In civil courts it’s about whether the claimant or defendant has given the most evidence — who
tipped the scale the most? → balance of probability
○ In criminal courts, you have to be 100% certain that the person the state is prosecuting is guilty.
It would be unethical to make a person go to prison for life if there is even a very slight
possibility that they are completely innocent → beyond reasonable doubt
The distinction between law and fact
In general, civil cases require the claimant to prove not only the facts which give rise to the claim, but also the
principles of law that which provide a remedy in respect to the facts proved
If a pedestrian was run over by a car, it must first be proved that the defendant did run him over, and then
prove that the law of negligence provides him with a remedy in respect to his
Generally criminal law also requires the prosecutor to prove both fact and law
Divisions of Civil Courts
1. **Supreme Court
a. Highest Supreme Court in the country
2. **Court of Appeal
a. Civil division
3. *High Court
a. Family Division
b. Chancery Division
c. Queen’s Bench Division
4. County Court (including Small Claims Court)
3
, **These courts are appeal courts only
* These have both appeal and first instance jurisdiction
Explanations
Supreme Court
● Hears appeals from the court of appeal
● A “leapfrog” appeal can be made direct from the High Court to the Supreme Court if all parties consent
and the Supreme Court gives permission
Court of Appeal
● Hears appeals from the high court
High Court
Family Division
● Concerned with family matters
Chancery Division
● Deals with matters concerning equity, including bankruptcy, mortgages, trusts, wills
Queen’s Bench Division
● Deals with everything else (common law disputes such as contract and tort cases)
County Court
● Not a case of first instance court
● Will appeal to the high court
○ You cannot appeal because you are unsatisfied with the outcome, you have to apply and show
that there has either been a misapplication of the law or there is new evidence that could
change the outcome of the case
● Claims for less than 100,000 GBP start here, unless it is a claim for personal injuries in which case the
limit is 50,000 GBP (don’t need to know, they vary)
East v. Maurer [1991]2AllER 33
(Plaintiff/Claimant sues Defendant) case reference
On appeal Appellant/Respondent
Standard of Proof On a balance of probability
Finding : Decision in favour of Plaintiff/Claimant or Defendant
Object : Remedies, usually money “Damages”
● East v. Maurer
4