Legislative Mechanism in Common and Civil law : Different roads leading to same destination

 

Table of contents

• literature review
• Introduction
• Characterstics of the Constitution of common law countries( UK and USA) and civil law countries( France and Switzerland)
• Constitution of the Great Britain and its features
• Constitution of the United States Of America: Feautres
• Characterstics of the consitutiton of the France fifth Republic
• Features of the Swiss Constitution
• India a perfect blend of common law and civil law
• Conclusion
• Glossary
• Bibliography

 

Literature review

The close reading of secondary source material drawn from the library and internet database for research on this topic following attempt is made to review the literature:

1. H. Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History (London, 2002).
2. Joseph Dainow, “The Civil Law and the Common Law: Some Points of Comparison,” American Journal of Comparative Law, volume 15.
3. M.Olson. Democratic Legislative Institutions. A comparative view. 1994.
4. Legislative law and process. Cases and materials. J.Hetzel. 1980.
5. Olson D. The Legislative Process. N.Y. 1980

In all these literatures ( above stated) there is good thorough explanation  given but there is gap that the both the laws i.e. common law and civil law are moving ahead in their own ambit at their own pace but it is not shown that they both are moving in same direction towards same goal.

All these  Study material shows that both the laws are working according to the nations following these laws and they have different approach, their ways are different but none says or shows what they are leading to same goal and destination.

 

Introduction

When we discuss law and that too specifically comparative public law, there is high probability that a portion of the legal terms or expressions has practically similar connotations yet there is contrast in their effects and implications. Furthermore, these circumstances becomes more mind boggling when legal experts or specialists native of one legal system faces other legal systems.

But when we observe or when comparative studies are done between both the laws it is often observed that the conclusive result comes out to be almost similar. In many situations it has been admitted that both the systems i.e. civil law and common law originated from entirely two different school of thoughts and even though they are continents apart, today that gap between them has become lesser and there is not much contrast in them.

The homogenous social needs, and similar economic and technical conditions, have eventually led to the adoption of similar solutions for their legal problems and legislative processes. Hence we can say that the results are quite identical to each other,yet the methods used to reach them have nevertheless been extremely divergent. Conversely, neither would it be correct to say that there has been any  rapprochement between these two great systems.

If we go through the evolution of both the legal systems and cover all the historical aspects regarding their emergence and how they worked, we can find many dissimilarities or differences but eventually have lead their ways  towards a common goal of justice, equity, good conscience and betterment or development of their subjects.

Common law is by and large uncodified. This implies that there is no extensive accumulation of legal rules and statutes. In common law relies on some scattered statutes, which are decisions given by legislation, it is to a great extent in light of precedent, which means the legal choices that have just been made in comparable cases. These points of reference are kept up after some time through the records of the courts and in addition truly archived in accumulations of case law known as yearbooks and reports. The points of reference to be connected in the choice of each new case are controlled by the directing judge. Subsequently, judges have a tremendous part in forming American and British law. Precedent-based law works as an ill-disposed framework, a challenge between two contradicting parties under the watchful eye of a judge who moderates. A jury of ordinary individuals without legal perception chooses the realities of the case. The judge subsequently decides the fitting sentence in view of the jury’s decision.

The term civil law gets from the Latin ius civile, the law pertinent to every single Roman cive or residents. Its beginnings and models are to be found in the great assemblage of Roman law authorized by the Emperor Justinian in the 6th century CE. While this aggregation was lost toward the West inside many years of its creation, it was rediscovered and made the reason for lawful direction in eleventh-century Italy and Corpus iuris civilis is the name by which sixteen century was known. Succeeding eras of legitimate researchers all through Europe adjusted the standards of antiquated Roman law in the Corpus iuris civilis to contemporary needs. Medieval researchers of Catholic church law, or group law, were additionally affected by Roman law grant as they gathered existing religious lawful sources into their own far reaching arrangement of law and administration for the Church, a foundation fundamental to medieval culture, governmental issues, and higher learning. By the late Middle Ages, these two laws, civil and canon, were taught at most colleges and shaped the premises for a mutual assemblage of legal idea. The birth and advancement of the medieval civil law custom in light of Roman law was in this way indispensable to European lawful improvement. It offered a store of lawful standards and tenets contributed with the expertise of old Rome and hundreds of years of recognized legal scholars, and it held out the likelihood of a far reaching lawful code giving procedural and substantive law to all circumstances.

Civil Law is classified. Nations with civil law frameworks have exhaustive, persistently refreshed legitimate codes that determine all issues equipped for being brought under the steady gaze of a court, the pertinent system, and the proper discipline for every offense. Such codes recognize diverse classifications of law: substantive law sets up which acts are liable to criminal or civil arraignment, procedural law builds up how to decide if a specific activity establishes a criminal demonstration, and corrective law sets up the proper punishment. In a civil law framework, the judge’s part is to build up the actualities of the case and to apply the provisions of the appropriate code. In spite of the fact that the judge regularly brings the formal charges, examines the issue, and decides the case, he or she works inside a structure set up by a far reaching, arranged provisions of laws. The judge’s choice is subsequently less vital in forming civil law than the choices of lawmakers and legitimate researchers or legal researchers who frame or draft the codes.

 

CHARACTERSTICS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF COMMON LAW NATIONS ( UK AND USA) AND CIVIL LAW NATIONS ( FRANCE AND SWITZERLAND)

We know, that without constitution no state can exists ; either codified or not. An explanatory examination of the highlights of the famous constitutions of the present world is conceivable just through seeing a portion of the fundamental and particular highlights of them. English constitution being the oldest one needs particular consideration and first inclination and afterward different constitutions. Consequently a concise exchange on the highlights of the constitutions of Great Britain, USA, France and Switzerland , step by step, will empower one to have a thorough comparison.

CONSTITUTION OF GREAT BRITAIN : FEATURES

THE GREAT BRITAIN is officially known as “Joined Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.” The British constitution is the classic example of evolution or we can say that it is evolutions product and the development of the said constitution is constant process. It has been borrowed from various sources: traditions, sanctions, statutes, legal judgments or decisions and prominent works done by researchers regarding the matter.

Some essential features of the British Constitution are:

1. Evolved Constitution: English constitution is the aftereffect of development of political organizations and institutions  over hundreds of years. It depends on conventions which are altered by decisions taken by judiciary and parliamentary laws. This is not single document but rather various chronicled historical documents. According to munro “ British Constitution is the ongoing growth process rather than complete in its nature. It is the offspring of chance and even wisdom, whom guidance is provided by ancient norms and sometimes by high plans.
2. Unwritten : Another critical element of English Constitution is its characteristic of being unwritten. The guidelines and standards controlling the circulation and direction of legislative forces have never been codified. The vast majority of the constitutional principles have developed by precedents or experiences. It is not the workmanship of any constitution making body or Assembly. The unwritten idea of the British constitution does not imply that none of the standards are codified. There are a few codified parts, like Magna Carta, parliamentary Acts of 1991 and 1949, Reform Acts and Bill of rights. The unwritten part is significantly heavier than the codified part.
3. Evolutionary : English constitution is the offspring of intelligence and possibility. It has advanced itself. It is the most seasoned among existing constitutions. Its general frame work has experienced no progressive change for as long as three centuries.
4. Flexible Character : In UK there is no contrast between constitutional law and general or ordiary law .The parliament in England  is above all or supreme. The power or ability to make and change the constitution is vested with the parliament. By the straightforward procedure of law making anything to can be included and erased from it. Since the strategy for revision is straightforward; British constitution is not at all rigid in nature.[1]
5. Lack of Harmonization between practical and theory: There exist an big disparity between the theory of constitution and administrative practice in UK. Theoretically the Crown has all the administration of Britain. The majority of the legislature are the workers of the Crown. They are summoned and expelled at the imperial carefulness. No law is successful without the Crown’s assent. All Armed forces are commanded by the king. The King alone can pronounce war and peace treaties .Theoretically the King is the wellspring of every single legislative power Be that as it may, this is in principle. Practically speaking the King has progressed toward becoming simply a nonentity. He rules, yet does not run the show. The legislature of Britain is in theory  and absolute monarchy however in real practice – limited monarchy and high constitutional democracy. All the administrative forces are presently moved from the King to the    Genuinely the King has now controls just through pastors(ministers).
6. Supremacy of parliament: UK’s parliament is sovereign to draft or amend any law. No foundation in England is skillful to challenge the Acts of parliament. Concept of judicial review is also absent. Whatever the parliament does is legitimate ,protected and constitutional.[2]
7. Unitary Constitution: English political framework is unitary and non federal in shape. In Britain all elements of the administration are practiced by one single Central

[1] Peter Stein, Roman Law in European History (Cambridge, 1999).

[2] S.F.C. Milsom, Historical Foundations of the Common Law (London, 1981).

 

There is no division of power amongst provisional and central governments. provisional governments have no unique forces. They are made by the central government for the administrative comfort. They can be altered or annulled by the central government anytime .

8.Parliamentary form of Government: The UK has given birth to parliamentary form of government. The cabinet is always accountable to the parliament. Theoretically or on papers  king has all the powers as he is the nominal executive. But in practical world Prime Minister exercises his all powers. There is parliament and the council of ministers  or cabinet is selected from it. And this cabinet is individually as well as collectively responsible to the parliament.[3]

9.Rule of Law: Another one of a kind element of the British constitution is the arrangement of run of law, which is derived in Britain. It implies that the Government decisions( administration demonstrations ) are as per the arrangement of laws. It has never been sanctioned as a statute yet understood in the different demonstrations of the parliament; judiciary’s call and in the common law. It really suggests the matchless supremacy  of law in England. There is no statute or act which sets out the basic rights of the general masses. The essential rights ( fundamental) of the subjects are secured by the principle of rule of law.[4]

10.Independence of Judiciary : the English Constitution guarantees that there should be independent judiciary . Judges are appointed instead of elected by the Crown and Lord Chancellor and the impeachment can be done only  by the sovereign addressing both the houses.

11.Checks and Balances: The principle of checks and balances is very much there in English Constitution. No law can be treated as finally passed unless queen signs it no matter if it is passed by the parliament and on the other side no order given by queen is valid until it is countersigned by some ministers.

12. No Doctrine of Separation of powers:  the said doctrine is not valid in totality in UK.

[3] Joseph Dainow, “The Civil Law and the Common Law: Some Points of Comparison,” American Journal of Comparative Law, volume 15, number 3 (1966-7), p. 419-35.

[4]J.H. Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History (London, 2002).

 

The Queen is very important art of the legislation process and leader of the executive and president of the judicial wing of the country. Members of cabinet has Lord chancellor in it and moreover he is the president of house of Lords.. The cabinet Ministers heads most od the departments of the government. so we can observe that Under English Constitution  the legislature, the cabinet,  and other wings like judiciary are closely related to each other and there is no such separation. [5]

English Constitution is mixture of Democracy, Monarchy and Anarchy that means British have harmoniously blended themselves within three different features.

 

 CHARACTERSTICS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF USA

 

 In Philadelphia convention which was held in 1787 the current constitution of United States of America was adopted and in 1789 it came in force. The constitution of United States of America is the oldest written constitution f the world. It has very unique and specific system or mechanism of delegation of powers , even the system of government, executive and legislation also has its unique systems.

1. Written character : Very similar to all other federal nations of the world, USA also has its constitution in written form. We can say that it was offspring of the convention held in Philadelphia. Representatives from 12 states was present in the convention and then the delegate from the Rhode Island agreed with the draft in its originality. And then it allowed the fedral government liberty to its states. Initially when constitution was adopted there were 13 states and presently the number rose to 50.[6]

Not Flexible character: we can observe that the said constitution of the USA is the most rigid in its nature in the entire world. To amend this constitution the process is really long /lengthy process which is even complicated also. The process to amend the constitution is totally   different from the process of drafting ordinary law . the rigidity

[5] Alan Cromartie, The Constitutionalist Revolution: An Essay on the History of England 1450-1642 (Cambridge, 2006).

[6] Perovich. Common Law. in 15A AM. JUR. 2D 593- 620 (1976).

 

2. can be seen as by the fact that only 26 amendments have been made till date.

3.Federal character: the constitution of USA is federal in nature. initially it was 13 states federation and presently there are 50 sates. The residuary powers are to be exercised by the federal states and we can say that USA’s constitution has a weak center.

4.Supremacy of the Constitution: in  USA the law which is supreme of all is the constitution. No one is above the constitution or no state or center can override it. The supreme court of USA can declare any law unconstitutional but only on merits.[7]

5.Separation of powers: the basis of the constitution of the America is the doctrine of the separation of the powers which was explained in ‘the spirit of laws” y montesque and only on this doctrine the maximum attempt was made to separate the three wings i.e. judiciary , executive and legislation.

6.Check and balances: if we implement the doctrine of separation of powers in its complete rigidness then it will be difficult for the government to function properly and smoothly and then the law makers or the framers have introduced this new doctrine to reduce the level of difficulty , and the doctrine is doctrine of checks and balances. Its so sophisticated in its nature that all the organs of the government have been locked and inter checked. The president of the USA is very powerful and he has the veto power to keep an eye on the Congress and similarly Congress can also override the US president with the 2/3^rd Other than this the president also has power of or weapon of pocket veto. By using this president can stop any bill to get passed. Then on the other hand confirmation from the senate is required in all the matters of appointment or any treaties made by the head of the executive wing.[8]

7.Bills of right: fundamental rights of a every citizen is guaranteed by the constitution.  Fundamental rights were not listed in the initial constitution but by the ways of amendments they were included in the constitution  and now these rights can never be suspended unless by a constitutional amendment.

[7] McLaughlin. Common Law, in 3 THE GUIDE TO AMERICAN LAW 102-07 (1983).

 

[8] E. BROWN, BRITISH STATUTES IN AMERICAN LAW, 1776-1836 (1964).

8.Judicial Review: In USA all the courts including Supreme Courts and lower courts have all the rights of judicial review, judiciary can make any law unconstitutional if it is inconsistent with the provisions of

9.Presidential form of Government: there is presidential form of government in USA.[9] All powers related to executive wing are vested with the president. Theoretically presidential elections were indirect but practically now they are direct. President is not at all accountable to congress , moreover congress cant remove him from his office. Congress cant be dissolved by him.. The members of the presidents cabinet are neither answerable to the congress and they cant be member of the congress.

10.Dual citizenship: there is dual citizenship. One is citizen of USA and also of the state where he has domicile.

11.Bicameral legislation: there are two houses, one upper( Senate) and lower (House of representatives ). The upper house of the USA i.e. Senate is more powerful than the House of representatives. Senate can be called as most powerful upper house in the whole world . it has 100 members with tenure of 6 years. whereas lower house consists of 435 members with tenure of 2 years.

 

FRANCE CONSTITUTION: FEATURES

After reading French Constitution we can say that France has undergone so many experiments related to its political framework and even they hold a world record in field of making constitution. Prior to the French Revolution France had absolute monarchy in which peoples interest was ignored in totally. Then after the revolution France adopted the declaration of rights of man and citizen. Representative Democracy was inaugurated by the French people only. Prior to the French revolution the king rules according to the divine right as  there were no codified constitution. In 1791 France got there written constitution but it turns to be a failure. In 1793 another constitution was made known as Montaguard Constitution which was also replaced by rule of directory in 1795. Rule of directory the Napoleon was the leader. Then 1804 Napoleon  crowned himself as king thus France went back to monarchy . then this monarchy ended in 1848 and France again became Republic in

[9] ibid

1852  Louis Napoleon  removed the constitution and France became again Monarchy. In 1870 France became republic for the third time and the constitution of the third republic was  abolished in 1940. Then constitution of the fourth republic was  in force from 1946 – 1958 .then in 1958 constitution of the fifth republic came into force which is present and working good till now.

1. Preamble: preamble is the main part of the  constitution  which affirms declaration of human rights of 1789 and the basis of this declaration in general will and natural law through which citizens are guaranteed with fundamental rights but preamble cant be enforced with any means of judiciary.
2. Written constitution: The constitution of the fifth republic has 92 articles and 15 titles. It is very similar to American constitution as it is also very brief.
3. Rigid Constitution: the process of amendment of the constitution is very rigid and hence cant be amended as an ordinary law
4. Mixture of parliamentary and presidential forms: this present French constitution is combination of different principles first is principle of parliamentary democracy and second principle of presidential democracy and the prime minister and his cabinet is  dealing  parliament and accountable to it . we can say that present system in France is more quasi presidential rather than parliamentary.. The authority of president is more than prime minister.[10]
5. Republican form of Government: Now France is secular, indivisible and democratic republic.it focuses on equality before law of all citizens and there is no distinction for this on any basis. The president is head of the state and he is elected through direct elections.[11]
6. Separation of legislative and executive powers.
7. Constitutional Council: This is unique concept which France has under its constitution this council has function to decide  the constitutionality of both the governmental acts and  parliamentary acts. It has 9 members whose term is also 9 years which cant be renewed . every third year one third members will be replaced.

[10] Constitution of France

[11] ibid

8.Ambiguous , untidy and vague constitution: this present constitution is really vague and untidy work. It ahs lots of confusing aspects . it doesn’t completely describe the system of government.[12]

CONSTITUTION OF SWITZERLAND

Switzerland is the classic example of the democracy ,the republic of the Switzerland  is not very big nation. it is situated in the Europe. Four different languages are spoken in the country and Romansh is the official language. We can say that Swiss democracy one of the strongest and oldest democracy of the world . During the war times Switzerland they are able to maintain neutral relations with every nation and hence it helped them prosper themselves in a very effective manner. In the nation the process of unification started in 1291 and it completed in 1840’s.

1. written and lengthy constitution: in total there are 123 articles in the Swiss constitution.
2. Rigid: Swiss constitution is not very flexible in nature yet not rigid like USA’s constitution. The process for amendment is very complex and lengthy . federal assembly initiates any amendment then it cant take effect unless it is approved through referendum by a majority of citizens.
3. Republican Constitution: In Europe one of the oldest republic is Switzerland. Constitution of 1874 makes republic in center as well as states(cantons).[13]
4. Federal Form of government: the power is delegated at the levels of national and state( cantonal ) level and this division of power is done on   the basis of USA model. During Emergency national government has supremacy over cantons.[14]
5. Democratic character: According to Zurcher  , “ Switzerland and democracy has become synonyms these days and this is because people of the nation has say in its working and government  is under their control. And they are equal before the law , they have all the basic fundamental rights.

[12] Constitution of France

[13] Constitution of Switzerland

[14] ibid

6.Bicameral legislation: the upper house (council of states) represents cantons it has 44 members and lower house ( national Council) which has 200 members.

7.Position of judiciary: Swiss Federal Judiciary has very less or limited power in judicial review. It can only has its say when the law in unconstitutional.

8.Dynamic constitution.

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA( MIXTURE OF COMMON AND CIVIL LAW)

Indian constitution is very much unique in itself as it is one of the lengthiest written constitution of the world. It is adopted on 26 January 1950.

1. written and detailed constitution: it took around 2years and eleven months and eighteen days to draft this constitution and enact it. It is very detailed and self explanatory in many aspects.
2. Preamble of the constitution: this is well drafted document which serves as the golden key to the constitution and it is preamble only which declares India a secular, democratic, republic nation. In nut shell it shows the nature of the Indian State .
3. Democratic socialist State: In 1976 when the Indian constitution is amended the word socialist was added in the preamble  and now it is regarded as prime feature of the nation.
4. Secular state: India gives special status to no religion. There is no concept of the state religion in the country.
5. Union of states: Article 1 states that “India that is Bharat is a Union of states”.
6. Perfect blend of Federalism and Unitarianism.
7. Mixture of rigidity and flexibility: Indian Constitution is rigid in its some parts, some of the provisions can be amended easily and few are those which can not be amended easily. Amendment can be under article 368.[15]
8. Bicameral legislation: there are two houses lower house ( lok sabha) and the upper House ( Rajya Sabha). Lok sabha represents the people of India it can have maximum strength of 550 members and these members are directly elected, whereas  members of rajya sabha are indirectly elected. Upper house can have maximum of 250 members.
9. Independent Judiciary: The judiciary in India is truly independent , Judges are being appointed by the President, there is judicial review, even judicial activism.[16]
10. Constitution is borrowed from different sources.[17]

 

CONCLUSSION

 AFTER GOING THROUGH BASIC FEATURE OF THE NATIONS WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENCES IN COMMON LAW SYSTEM AND CIVIL LAW SYSTEM

 

                                     CIVIL LAW                                             COMMON LAW

Legal System	This system originated in Europe and important feature is that its core principles are written or codified into a  well defied system system which serves as the primary source of law.	Under this Legal system, law develops by case law, or by judgements whether decisions of courts and tribunals.
Role of judges	Rulings are non binding on third parties. Under civil law system judges role is very strict to the the provsions of the code or statute  they don’t do any kinf od judicial activism	Makes decisions sets point of reference  between lawyers.Judges choose matters of law and, where a jury is missing, they likewise discover actualities. Most judges once in a while ask widely into issues before them, rather depending on contentions introduced by the part

[15] Constitution of India

[16] ibid

[17] ibid

 

Role of judges	Rulings are non binding on third parties. Under civil law system judges role is very strict to the the provsions of the code or statute  they don’t do any kinf od judicial activism	Makes decisions sets point of reference between lawyers.Judges choose matters of law and, where a jury is missing, they likewise discover actualities. Most judges once in a while ask widely into issues before them, rather depending on contentions introduced by the part
Countries	Spain, France, Switzerland, Japan, Germany, most African nations.	United States, England, Australia, Canada
Constitution	Always	Not always
Precedent	Just used to decide authoritative of constitutional court matters	Present and future cases are relevance
Jury opinion	In instances of civil law, the feeling of the jury might not need to be consistent. Laws change by state and nation. Juries are available only in criminal cases; essentially never associated with common activities. Judges guarantee law beats enthusiasm.	Juries are included just of laypersons — never judges and, practically speaking, just infrequently legal advisors — and are once in a while utilized to choose non-criminal issues outside the United States. Their capacity is to measure confirm displayed to them
History	The civil law convention created in mainland Europe in the meantime and was connected in the provinces of European magnificent powers, for example, Spain and Portugal.	common law frameworks have advanced essentially in England and its previous provinces, including everything except one US purview and everything except one Canadian jurisdiction. Generally, the English-talking world works under common law.
Sources of Law	1. Constitution 2. Legislation – statutes and subsidiary legislation 3. Custom 4. International Law	1. Constitution (not in the UK) 2. Legislation – Statutes and subsidiary legislation 3. Judicial precedent – common law and equity 4. Custom 5. Convention 6. International Law
Evolution	The two frameworks have comparative wellsprings of law-both have statutes and both have case law, they approach control and resolve issues in various courses, from alternate points of view

 

Both the legal system have their own particular importance and their individual significance depends from case to case. Common law, which is a court made law, on different occurrences encouraged and advanced the aim and uses principles of the civil law. Both when united fills the hole which exist in the legitimate organization and the control of law.

I would state that both are similarly better and imperative for a honest society and likewise for socially refreshed (law changes with the change in the society).

I think reality—and what most nations have perceived—is that both the legal systems have their advantages and disadvantages. For instance, there wasn’t a lot of codified law in the civil law world even into the nineteenth century. Yet, now, evencivil law nations have turned out to be intensely determined by statutes and codes, perceiving that arranged law does an extraordinary arrangement towards advancing consistency in mediation and openness. In the meantime, a great part of the common law world now looks a considerable measure like the common law, i.e., with judges composing definite and contemplated conclusions referencing and deciphering law and point of reference, despite the fact that the purposes behind refering to point of reference might be extraordinary. Numerous purviews additionally consider some level of judge-made law, which is the sign of the custom-based law.

Actually, I imagine that common law—since it gives judges more tact to recognize once in a while slight contrasts in cases—advances an all the more just equity framework, yet the portrayal of civil law as inflexible and loaded with gaps hasn’t been precise in quite a while. Actually most countries, after some time, have taken a “buffet menu” way to deal with the law, obtaining those components that work for their specific governments and social orders, to such an extent that the contrasts between the two legal systems are not as much as what they used to be.

 

Glossary

Civil law – the system of law that emerged in continental Europe beginning in the Middle Ages and is based on codified law drawn from national legislation and custom as well as ancient Roman law.

Code – the collection of laws of a country or laws related to a particular subject.

Codification – the process of compiling and systematizing laws into a code.

Common Law – the system of law that emerged in England begin- ning in the Middle Ages and is based on case law and precedent rather than codified law.

Corpus iuris civilis – meaning“body of civil laws,” the name given to the compilation of Roman law ordered by the Byzantine em- peror Justinian I in 529 CE.

Precedent – a judicial decision in a court case that may serve as an authoritative example in future similar caseses.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

J.H. Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History (London, 2002).

Manlio Bellomo, The Common Legal Past of Europe 1000-1800 (Washington DC, 1995).

Alan Cromartie, The Constitutionalist Revolution: An Essay on the History of England 1450-1642 (Cambridge, 2006).

Joseph Dainow, “The Civil Law and the Common Law: Some Points of Comparison,” American Journal of Comparative Law 15 (1966-7), p. 419-35.

S.F.C. Milsom, Historical Foundations of the Common Law (London, 1981).

Peter Stein, Roman Law in European History (Cambridge, 1999).

R.C. Van Caenegem, The Birth of the English Common Law (Cambridge, 1988).

Constitution of the United States

Constitution of India

Constitution of the Great Britain

Constitution of the Switzerland

Constitution of the France Fifth Republic

McLaughlin. Common Law, in 3 THE GUIDE TO AMERICAN LAW (1983).

Perovich. Common Law. in 15A AM. JUR. 2D (1976)

E. BROWN, BRITISH STATUTES IN AMERICAN LAW, 1776-1836 (1964)