Regarding legal systems, most countries generally fall within two categories: common law and civil law. Common law countries consist of countries that were former British colonies. Among these are the United States, England, Canada, Australia and India. Civil law countries are normally former French, Dutch, Spanish or Portuguese colonies, which includes Central and South America. Also included are Central and Eastern European and East Asian countries. Specific Civil Law countries are China, Japan, Germany, France and Spain. A couple of countries are bi juridical, meaning they follow a combination of both common and civil law. Examples of bi-juridical countries are South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe (Key Features 1).
Common law came about in the English monarchy. During this period “writs” were used to solve issues; however, writs could not solve all issues presented, therefore, they needed to come up with appropriate solutions for unresolved problems (Syam 1). They then used these new ideas to solve future cases. This became known as common law. Moreover, civil law developed in European nations through the code of laws created by the Roman Empire Justinian in 600 C.E. (What is Civil Law). These laws then further developed in many countries to become what is known as Civil Law.
The source of common law relies heavily on previous decisions made by other judges. Legislative bodies make the laws and then it is the judicial bodies job to be able to interpret and apply these laws to cases. In trials where the decision is ambiguous and has not been written in legislative laws judges look at prior decisions made by other courts on the same issue. They then use the decision that these cases ruled and apply it to their own case. If there is a new case that no judge has made a verdict for, the judge of the case decides the verdict and this opinion of the judge will then be used for future trials. Lawyers in common law are the voice of their client’s opinions. They present the cases and the judge’s act like referees to decide the case. The main advantages to common law are that it is fair, expedient and efficient (TransLegal 1). Since it is based on previous decisions, all people are treated equally because each result will be the same no matter who is involved in the case. It is expedient or convenient because people involved in the case can have a solid idea of what the outcome is going to be. Lastly, it is efficient because it does not take judges long to decide the verdict since they are working based on past verdicts. The biggest disadvantage to common law is cases where an insufficient decision is made. It is unlikely for judges to go against previous decisions even if it was not the best decision that could have been made. This could mean that the same bad decision could be used for years without being changed. Also, a lot of controversy can arise in cases that no previous decision has been made, which could pose as another disadvantage to common law.
Why It Is So Important To Have A Lawyer The legal system affects all part of the society from driving in your own car to signing a contract and a lot more. As a result, it holds great responsibility in upholding and following strict code of ethics to have an attorney or as how others call as an attorney. You might not even be familiar but, there are various types of lawyers who has array of duties and responsibilities. You may also see some lawyers specializing in different fields of law ranging from intellectual property rights, environmental laws, bankruptcy laws but most of the time, you can find them in private practice which they are concentrating on civil or criminal law. They could provide representation in court, business transactions, mediation problems, family matters and several other legal proceedings where law could be discussed. Because of this, it is extremely important to have a lawyer so by that, they will be able to guide you about your obligations and legal rights and they will even suggest you what should be your next move in personal and business matters. With this being said, not only those who are in trouble who need a lawyer. Even the smallest decisions we make will always need the help of a skilled and experienced lawyer to guide us in each step of the way about law regardless of what we do in life. And even in the simplest case of making lease agreement with the renter, you’ll need the advice and guidance of lawyer to be certain that your rights are protected.
Overwhelmed by the Complexity of Lawyers? This May Help
Believe it or not, the lawyer is called sometimes as a repairman as he is fixing what’s broken whether it involves personal or business matters. However, repairing your problem can also be a reason of someone’s despair. You need to know that in every case, there’s going to be a loser but, your attorney is there to be sure that you’ll be on the winning side.
5 Key Takeaways on the Road to Dominating Businesses
Take into account that a lawyer is a crucial part of the process and that is the reason why before making a selection, make it a point that you refer to state bar organization to help you find the appropriate lawyer according to your case. It’ll be a lot better if you are going to find a lawyer where you are most comfortable to, particularly when dealing with crucial cases. We all want to believe that our justice system really works. And with that, it’s the lawyer’s primary concern to be sure that your expectations are met or else, justice for his or her client might never be achieved.
How Can a Lawyer Help Me With My Malpractice Lawsuit? Every dental procedure includes a specific level of danger. Not all bad outcomes will result in compensation. Dental malpractice happens when a dentist/oral surgeon ignores the set standard of care and as a result, a patient suffers an injury. Sometimes, simple procedures such as cavity filling can go wrong. The below aspects must be demonstrated for the cause of injury to be considered dental malpractice. You will first have to show a patient-doctor relationship. The petitioner is required to demonstrate that they really enlisted the specialist they are suing, and he agreed being contracted. It becomes a challenge proving this when the doctor you are suing did not handle you individually. Yet another case that the patient needs to demonstrate is that the dental specialist broke the standard of care. You, the claimant may have to find a way to prove that indeed the dental practitioner breached the standard of care. Each dental practitioner is tasked with the responsibility of treating every patient as per the set community standards. Treating your patients in an otherwise incompetent and less professional way may lead to injuries and in the end a dental malpractice lawsuit. Where the dental practitioner did not adhere to these standards, the patient can file a lawsuit. Though, for a claim to be productive, the petitioner should include a medical professional and a negligence attorney. Patients are likewise required to demonstrate that it is for sure the breach of the standard of care that brought on his/her injuries. It is not possible to present a claim for malpractice if you can’t prove that you experienced real damages as a result of the breach of the standard of care. The following are the sorts of damages that might be caused by malpractice malpractice; extra medical bills, loss of income, and physical pain or mental torture. Now look at this illustration, a patient goes to the dentist, who performs an examination and finds an infected area near one tooth. Competent dental specialists would use x-rays to detect the infected region then prescribe medicine to treat the infection and lessen pain.
Why Services Aren’t As Bad As You Think
Instead of taking an x-ray to find the infection, and then prescribe medication, the dentist instructs an assistant to extract two teeth in the general area of the pain. After several weeks, the pain becomes too much, and the patient decides to see another dentist.
A Quick Overlook of Professionals – Your Cheatsheet
The patient’s new dentist discovers that infection had spread and required urgent surgical treatment. The patient’s first dentist ought to have evaluated the infection and given medication professionally rather than allowing the untrained assistant to treat the patient. At the point when the dentist neglected this, he plainly veered off from the dental standard of care in the community.