世界法律体系简介(中英文)

合集下载

Unit 1 Legal Systems

Unit 1 Legal SystemsText AText translation由于美国实行联邦制，美国人通常会意识到不同管辖区的法律可能会有所不同。

从政治上而言，每一个独立的司法管辖区都有自己独立的法律制度的说法是很正确的。

但是，在法律传统和法律方法方面，世界上大多数的法律制度都可以归于为数不多的几个法律传统之一。

在西方以及在世界上那些被殖民化的或受到西方强烈影响的地区，存在着两个主要的法律传统或者法系——大陆法系和普通法系。

美国的法律制度属于普通法系（路易斯安那州除外）。

这篇文章为你介绍普通法系和大陆法系的起源和发展，以及这两大法系之间的主要区别，尤其是法律方法方面的区别。

1. 两大法系的起源以及它们在世界各地的分布情况1）普通法系普通法系起源于英国。

早在1066年，一种新的法律秩序就由威廉征服的英国所建立。

但在1066年，普通法并不存在。

征服者威廉（英王威廉一世）并没有废除地方的习惯法和法院。

地方法院继续适用当地的习惯法。

对于整个王国来说并没有统一适用的法律。

尽管如此，国王还是在威斯敏斯特建立了一些王室法院。

它们最初的管辖权是很有限的，但是最终扩大到使地方法院被废止。

王室法院的判决成为整个王国通行的法律，即普通法。

普通法的渊源是先前的判例，因而普通法最主要的传统意义上的渊源是判例而不是立法，这一点是很正确的。

当普通法发展成为一整套不公正的、非常严格的正式的程序时，国王创设了新的法院而不是以立法的形式修改法律。

当一个臣民认为普通法的判决导致了不公正的结果时，他（在这种时候通常不是她）会向国王请愿。

请愿是如此之多，以至于国王创设了衡平法院。

它会准许酌情的救济以修正普通法。

这个法院判决产生了一系列可被称为衡平法的法律。

这种衡平法也是建立于先前的司法判例的基础之上的。

普通法和衡平法都是普通法系传统的部分。

大不列颠帝国把普通法带到了世界各地。

普通法在许多国家得以“继受”。

但它的继受在欧洲殖民者成为主要居民并且将他们的法律强加于当地的土著居民的那些国家中最为成功。

五大法律体系

五大法律体系在当今社会，法律作为维护社会秩序、保障公民权利和促进公平正义的重要工具，其体系的多样性和复杂性反映了不同国家和地区的历史、文化、政治和社会背景。

在全球范围内，主要存在着五大法律体系，分别是大陆法系、英美法系、伊斯兰法系、中华法系和印度法系。

大陆法系，又称民法法系，起源于古罗马法，以 1804 年的《法国民法典》和 1896 年的《德国民法典》为代表逐步发展起来。

大陆法系强调成文法的权威性，法律条文通常规定得较为详细和具体，法官在审判过程中主要依据成文法典进行裁决。

其特点包括法典化、逻辑性强、体系完整。

在大陆法系国家，法律的制定和修改通常由立法机关负责，法官的角色相对较为被动，主要是对法律条文进行解释和适用。

英美法系，又称普通法系，起源于英国，并在美国等国家得到广泛应用。

与大陆法系不同，英美法系以判例法为主要法律渊源，即法官通过对以往案例的判决形成具有约束力的法律规则。

英美法系注重司法实践和经验，法官在审判过程中具有较大的自由裁量权，可以根据案件的具体情况和公平正义的原则做出裁决。

此外，英美法系还强调程序正义，对司法程序的要求较为严格。

伊斯兰法系，以伊斯兰教教义为基础，广泛应用于伊斯兰国家。

伊斯兰法不仅涵盖了宗教、道德和法律规范，还涉及到人们生活的各个方面，如婚姻、家庭、继承、商业等。

其法律渊源主要包括《古兰经》和圣训，以及伊斯兰学者的权威解释。

伊斯兰法系强调宗教信仰与法律的紧密结合，法律的执行往往受到宗教机构和宗教领袖的监督和指导。

中华法系，是中国古代法律的总称，具有悠久的历史和深厚的文化底蕴。

中华法系以儒家思想为指导，强调礼法结合、德主刑辅。

在法律形式上，既有成文法，也有习惯法和判例。

中华法系注重维护社会等级秩序和家族伦理，其法律制度在历史上对周边国家产生了重要影响。

然而，随着社会的发展和变革，中华法系在近代逐渐衰落，但其中的一些法律理念和制度仍然对现代中国的法治建设具有一定的借鉴意义。

法律英语汇总

Unit 1 The Common Law and Its CompetitorsI. Give the Chinese Meaning of the Underlined Word or Phrase The curriculum and the materials studied are much the same in all law schools. （课程）Outside its home base, law has no validity at all.（有效性）Each legal system is specific to its country or its jurisdiction.（管辖范围）There never was an English equivalent of the Napoleonic Code.（等同物）The common law reigns wherever the English language is spoken （统治）In Canada, the civil law is dominated in the French-speaking province of Quebec.（处于支配地位）These superstatutes are enacted by the national parliament.（超级成文法典）This tenacious local system was the so-called common law.（本地系统）For one thing, the common law resisted codification.（法典化）The English brought the common law to their colonies and it took root and thrived.（繁荣）The legal systems of the English-speaking world have a definite family resemblance.（相似性）The English were not seduced by the majesty of Rome.（诱导）For example, the jury is a common-law institution.The common law also has its own peculiar features of substance, structure, and culture.（特征）In the 1990s, the countries of Eastern Europe renounced communism.（放弃）Lawyers in Mexico work in the private sector and are not employees of the government.（部门）In general, it is a fairly crude business to assign legal systems to this or that family.（粗制的）We have to remember that a legal system is not an exercise in history.（一成不变）II. Fill in Each Blank with a Proper Word or Phrase Given BelowA law student usually studies the law of a single country. 一名法科学生同城会学习单个国家的法律。

法律体系legal systems

The contemporary legal systems of the world are generally based on one of three basic systems: civil law, common law, and religious law– or combinations of these. However, the legal system of each country is shaped by its unique history and so incorporates individual variations.Religious law refers to the notion of a religious system or document being used as a legal source, though the methodology used varies.Common law (also known as case law or precedent) is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals that decide individual cases, as opposed to statutes adopted through the legislative process or regulations issued by the executive branch.Basic principles of common lawCommon law adjudicationIn a common law jurisdiction several stages of research and analysis are required to determine "what the law is" in a given situation. First, one must ascertain the facts. Then, one must locate any relevant statutes and cases. Then one must extract the principles, analogies and statements by various courts of what they consider important to determine how the next court is likely to rule on the facts of the present case. Later decisions, and decisions of higher courts or legislatures carry more weight than earlier cases and those of lower courts. Finally, one integrates all the lines drawn and reasons given, determines "what the law is” and one applies that law to the facts.The common law evolves to meet changing social needs and improved understanding “common law does not work from pre-established truths of universal and inflexible validity to conclusions derived from them deductively,”“its method is inductive, and it draws its generalizations from particulars.”The common law is more malleable. First, common law courts are not absolutely bound by precedent, but can (when extraordinarily good reason is shown) reinterpret and revise the law, without legislative intervention, to adapt to new trends in political, legal and social philosophy. Second, the common law evolves through a series of gradual steps, that gradually works out all the details, so that over a decade or more, the law can change substantially but without a sharp break, thereby reducing disruptive effects. In fact, the legislative process is very difficult to get started, as legislatures tend to delay action until a situation is totally intolerable.This illustrates two crucial principles: (a) The common law evolves, this evolution is in the hands of judges, and judges have "made law" for hundreds of years. (b) The reasons given for a decision are often more important in the long run than the outcome in a particular case.Interaction of constitutional, statutory and common lawIn almost all areas of the law, legislature-enacted statutes generally give only brief statements of general principle because legislatures operate under the assumption that statutes will be interpreted against the backdrop of the pre-existing common law and custom. So to find out what the precise law is that applies to a particular set of facts, one has to locate precedential decisions on the topic, and reason from those decisions by analogy.Overruling precedent—the limits of stare decisisDecisions of one circuit court are binding on the district courts, but are only persuasive authority on sister circuits. District court decisions are not binding precedent at all, only persuasive.Most of the U.S. federal courts of appealhave adopted a rule that the earlier panel decision is controlling, and to overrulea panel decision is very difficult. Also, the older decision remains controlling when an issue comes up the third time.Common law as a foundation for commercial economiesThe reliance on judicial opinion is a strength of common law systems, and is a significant contributor to the robust commercial systems. Because there is reasonably precise guidance on almost every issue, parties can predict whether a proposed course of action is likely to be lawful or unlawful, and have some assurance of consistency. This ability to predict gives more freedom to come close to the boundaries of the law. For example, many commercial contracts are more economically efficient, and create greater wealth, because the parties know ahead of time that the proposed arrangement, though perhaps close to the line, is almost certainly legal. Newspapers, taxpayer-funded entities with some religious affiliation, and political parties can obtain fairly clear guidance on the boundaries within which their freedom of expression rights apply.Contrasts between common law and civil law systemsConstant jurisprudence•Common law systems tend to give more weight to separation of powers between the judicial branch and the executive branch (which focuses in administrative law). In contrast, civil law systems often allow individual officials to exercise both powers.•In common law systems, a single decided case is binding common law. In contrast, in civil law systems, individual decisions have only advisory, not binding effect.General principles of lawIn common law systems, judge made law is binding to the same extent as statute or regulation. In civil law systems, case law is advisory, not binding. Civil law lawyers consult case law to obtain their best prediction of how a court will rule, but comparatively, civil law judges are less bound to follow it.Adversarial system vs. inquisitorial systemCommon law courts usually use an adversarial system, in which two sides present their cases to a neutral judge. In contrast, civil law systems usually use an inquisitorial system in which an examining magistrate serves two roles by developing the evidence and arguments for one side and then the other during the investigation phase and a judge or group of judges investigates the case.Contrasting role of treatises and academic writings in common law and civil law systemsIn common law jurisdictions, treatises are not the law, and lawyers and judges tend to use these treatises as only "finding aids" to locate the relevant cases.In common law jurisdictions, scholarly work is seldom cited as authority for what the law is. When common law courts rely on scholarly work, it is almost always only for factual findings, policy justification, or the history and evolution of the law, and the court's legal conclusion is reached through analysis of relevant statutes and common law.In contrast, in civil law jurisdictions, courts give the writings of law professors significant weight, partly because civil law decisions traditionally were very brief, sometimes no more than a paragraph stating who wins and who loses.。

世界主要法律体系第四讲英美法系

• 普通法法系的法典和大陆法系的法典具有区别： 1、普通法系的法典在体系上和结构上缺乏系统性和逻辑性，许多条文前后重复甚至矛盾，大都不过是对以前制定法的汇编。 2、在普通法法系国家，一个法典的颁布，并不意味着该领域存在的法律失去效力。在大陆法系国家，新法颁布意味着以前同类法律自然失去效力。 3、在普通法法系，法典的适用受到法官解释的限制，只有法官加以适用，它们才是真正的法律。由于传统，法官们经常把法典置于一旁，而依照判例法处理案件。在大陆法系国家，法官必须忠实地恪守法典规定。
第四讲普通法法系法系与普通法 • “普通法”一词具有不同含义： • 1、在广义上，指12世纪以后通行于英格兰的法律，它是在中央集权下形成的，由国王领导下的国家法院统一加以适用，区别于英格兰领主法院适用的习惯法，也区别于适用于特殊阶层和行业的商人法。 • 2、在狭义上，指12世纪以后由英格兰皇家法院所创立、适用和加以发展的判例法。从表现形式上和产生途径上，它区别于来自立法机构的制定法。 • 3、从比较法的角度，泛指以英格兰法为基础，以判例法为主要渊源的国家或地区的法律制度，相对于以制定法特别是编纂法典为特征的民法法系国家或地区的法律制度。普通法法系是一个以英格兰普通法为基础而形成的世界性法律体系，是当代世界法系之一；美国法在其中占有重要地位，故又称英美法系。
二、普通法法系的主要特点
• （一）以英国为中心、英国普通法为基础 • 普通法法系在形成和发展过程中，是以英国为中心向世界各地输出的，在传播方式上呈放射式。 • 在普通法系，英国普通法是基础，英语是普通法传播的媒介和工具，英联邦是加强成员国之间的联系和维持统一的纽带。20世纪特别是二战以来，美国在世界的重要地位，使其与英国法成为普通法法系的核心。

The Legal System 西方宪法介绍英文

Back
A Law Court
It is a place where legal matters are decided by a judge and jury or by magistrate（地方法官）.
Supreme Court
Back
Types of Law Courts
the supreme court（最高法院） a court of appeal（上诉法院）(in U.K. the House of Lords（上议院）) a criminal court（刑事法庭） a civil court（民事法庭） a juvenile court（未成年人法庭）
The Legal System
--by Vicky Yao 江苏教育学院
The Legal System
Constitution(宪法)
Two main branches of the law
A law court Process
A landmark decision
Legal advice, legal aid
Types of Constitution
1 written constitution The U.S.
2 unwritten constitution Britain
The British Constitution
The British Constitution
The British Constitution
mainsubdivisionsofthecivillaw?thefamilylaw家庭法?thelawofintellectualproperty知识产权法?thelawofcontract合同法?thelawoftorts民事侵权法?thelawofproperty财产法?theadministrativelaw行政法?thelawoflabour劳动法?themercantilelaw商业法?thecompanylaw公司法backalawcourt?itisaplacewherelegalmattersaredecidedbyajudgeandjuryorbymagistrate地方法官

外国法律制度

复习要点1、“法系”法系，是“法律族系”的简称，英语中称Legal genealogy 或Legal family，也可以译为“法族” 。

它是具有相同历史渊源和传统、相同（或相近）存在样式和运行方式的数个国家（或地区）的法律制度的归类。

注意：“法系”不是“法律体系”的简称，而是“法律族系”的简称。

2、民法法系也称罗马法法系、大陆法系、日耳曼法系。

原是欧洲大陆诸国（法国、德国、西班牙、葡萄牙等）的法律所构成的法律族系，在罗马法的基础上发展而来，以《法国民法典》为其典范，以成文法典为主要法律形式。

后来，历史上曾是法国、德国、西班牙、葡萄牙殖民地的国家和地区（如中国澳门地区），以及亚洲的日本、韩国、泰国、土耳其等国的法律，也成为民法法系的成员。

3、普通法法系普通法法系，也称为判例法系、英美法系、海洋法系。

是英联邦、原英国殖民地诸国和地区（英国、美国、加拿大、印度、巴基斯坦、孟加拉、马来西亚、新加坡、澳大利亚、新西兰、中国香港地区、以及非洲的部分国家和地区）的法律所构成的法律族系，由英国中世纪以来法律传统为基础发展而来，采用判例法和衡平法为主要形式。

民法法系和普通法法系，基本精神和原则是相同的。

但是在法律渊源、法律分类、法典化、法律术语、法律推理技术、法律发展方式、诉讼程序等方面，都存在很大的差异。

4、世界上第一部成文法典乌尔第三王朝的《乌尔纳姆法典》。

约公元前21世纪末，乌尔纳姆国王统一两河流域南部，创建乌尔第三王朝，实行中央集权统治，集军事、行政和司法大权于国王一身。

《乌尔纳姆法典》除序言外，有29条条文，内容涉及到损害与赔偿、婚姻、家庭和继承以及刑罚等，3、《汉穆拉比法典》公元前18世纪汉穆拉比（第六代巴比伦王）统一两河流域，制定《汉穆拉比法典》（又称石柱法），楔形文字法典范，标志着楔形文字法发展到较完备的程度。

4、《摩奴法典》印度法制史上第一部较为正规的法律典籍，约形于BC前2世纪至AD2世纪，较为全面地论述了吠陀的精义，规定种姓制度。

世界主要法律体系概要

世界主要法律体系概要世界主要法律体系概要大陆法系概念：又称民法法系、罗马--日耳曼法系。

是西方社会中，以罗马法为基础发展起来的历史最长、分布最广、影响最大的法系。

它以欧洲大陆法国和德国为代表，在罗马法的基础上，融合各种有关法律成分，以民法为典型，以法典化的成文法为主要形式，分为法德国两个支系。

范围：欧洲大陆各国。

法国派的国家包括：法国、比利时、荷兰、意大利、西班牙等。

德国派的国家包括：德国、希腊、奥地利、瑞士、日本等。

大陆法系的特点：（一）全面继承罗马法：不是照搬照抄，在实体和程序的规定上同古代罗马法有了很大不同。

五大法学家的法学著作和法律解释具有同等法律效力。

《民法大全》：由《查士丁尼法典》、《学说汇纂》和《法学阶梯》《新律》组成。

它的问世，标志着罗马法已发展到最发达、最完备阶段。

大陆法系的形成与政权的肯定或者某一最高权力机关实行的中央集权毫无关系(在欧洲大陆这一时期政治上不统一)，是以文化的共同性为基础建立起来的。

（普通法的发展同王权的扩张与高度集中的皇家法院的存在相互联系。

）罗马法的复兴是从12世纪开始的。

大陆法系继承罗马法的表现：1、接受了罗马法学家推动法律发展的一整套技术方法，以公私法的划分为例:2、吸收了许多罗马私法的原则和制度，特别是直接间接与保护私有财产和调整商品所有者之间的关系有关的原则和制度。

（二）实行法典化近代以后，各国都以法典编纂作为法律统一和法制建设完成的标志。

民法法系国家一般都建立了六法体系，即宪法、民法、商法、刑法、民事诉讼法、刑事诉讼法为主体，再以若干单行法作为补充的完整的成文法体系。

补救措施包括：解释法律、参考“判例”、修改法律和颁布单行法。

（三）明确立法与司法的分工，强调制定法的权威，不承认法官的造法功能。

特点表现:1、在法律渊源中制定法具有优先效力。

2、法官解释法律的任务只限于阐明法律的真意。

这种解释不能侵犯立法权，只能探求立法者赋予该法律条文的含义，并加以遵循。

世界法律体系简介(中英文)

1.how to understand the separation of power?The separation of powers, often imprecisely used interchangeably with the triaspolitica principle, is a model for the governance of a state (or who controls the state). The model was first developed in ancient Greece. Under this model, the state is divided into branches, each with separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with the powers associated with the other branches. The typical division of branches is into a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary. It can be contrasted with the fusion of powers in a parliamentary system where the executive and legislature (and sometimes parts of the judiciary) are unified.三权分立，往往不准确交替使用的三叠纪政治学原则，是一个典范的状态的治理（或谁控制的状态）。

在古希腊最早开发的模式。

在这种模式下，状态分为分支，每个单独的和独立的权力和责任领域，使得一个部门的权力不与与其他部门相关的权力冲突。

地理了解各国的法律体系和司法制度

地理了解各国的法律体系和司法制度在当今全球化的背景下，国家之间的交流与合作越来越紧密。

而了解各国的法律体系和司法制度，不仅有助于加深对不同国家的认知，还能更好地促进国际间的交往与合作。

本文将通过对比和分析，介绍几个不同国家的法律体系和司法制度，以期让读者对世界各国的法律风貌有更全面的了解。

美国法律体系和司法制度美国是世界上最大的刑事诉讼体系之一，其法律体系以英国普通法为基础，但受到罗马法系的影响。

美国法律以宪法为最高法律，其次是联邦法律和州法律。

联邦法律是由联邦议会通过的法律，适用于全国范围内；州法律由各州立法机关通过，适用于各自的州。

美国的司法制度是三权分立的，由联邦最高法院、联邦巡回上诉法院、联邦地区法院以及各州的最高法院、上诉法院和地方法院组成。

最高法院是最高司法机构，负责解释宪法，裁决最高法律争议。

联邦巡回上诉法院是第二级机构，负责处理上诉案件；地区法院是第一级机构，审理原始案件。

各州也有类似的法院系统。

中国法律体系和司法制度中国法律体系以大陆法系为主，受到社会主义法律原则的指导。

中国的法律体系有宪法、法律、行政法规、地方性法规以及部门规章等多个层级。

宪法是最高法律，对其他法律具有指导作用。

中国的司法制度由最高人民法院、高级人民法院和基层人民法院组成。

最高人民法院是最高司法机构，负责解释宪法和法律，统一司法解释。

高级人民法院是第二级机构，负责审理上诉案件；基层人民法院是第一级机构，审理大部分原始案件。

法国法律体系和司法制度法国法律体系以民法系为主，受到民法典的影响。

民法典是法国法律体系的基石，对其他法律具有指导作用。

除了民法典外，法国还有刑法典、商法典等专门法典。

法国的司法制度由最高法院、上诉法院和地方法院组成。

最高法院是最高司法机构，负责解释宪法和法律，统一司法解释。

上诉法院是第二级机构，负责处理上诉案件；地方法院是第一级机构，审理原始案件。

英国法律体系和司法制度英国法律体系以普通法系为主，受到习惯法的影响。

世界主要法律体系及其异同

世界主要法律体系及其异同从商业意义上讲，世界逐渐缩小为一个地球村，但是法律标准在世界各国仍然不同，国家法律对管理计划和企业经营有重大影响。

世界上主要国家的法律制度分属英美法系和大陆法系，另外，尚有少数国家的法律属伊斯兰法系和土著法。

绝大多数国家的法律系统都不是单一的，而是多种法系的混合。

一国的法律体系反映了该国的历史、宗教与道德规范、政治哲学、伦理传统以及通过与其他文化接触而吸收的外来文化。

法律体制一般分为如下几类.1.英美法系《又称普通法法系)英美法系是指以英国普通法为基础发展起来的法律的总称。

它首先产生于英国，后扩大到曾经是英国殖民地、附属国的许多国家和地区，包括美国、加拿大、印度、巴基斯坦、孟加拉、马来西亚、新加坡、澳大利亚、新西兰以及非洲的个别国家和地区。

在18世纪至19世纪，随着英国殖民地的扩张，英国法被传人这些国家和地区，英美法系发展成为世界主要法系之一。

英美法系中存在两大分支，即英国法和美国法，它们在法律分类、宪法形式、法院权力等方面存在一定的差别。

英美法系的主要特点是注重法典的延续性，以判例法(简单解释判例法就是以前怎么判，现在还是怎么判)为主要形式。

2.大陆法系(又称民法法系)在大陆法系中，法律规范以法典的形式存在，法典为第一法律渊源。

法典是各部门法典的系统的综合的汇编，法律分为民法、商法和刑法。

政府官员负贵法律条文的解释和实施细则的制订。

司法系统的每一部分都有自己的管理结构和法规。

由于大陆法系国家不是依据法院以前的裁决，同样的条文，可能产生解释上的偏差，因此在实行大陆法的国家，明确的法律条文非常重要。

大陆法源于古罗马法及此后的拿破仑法典。

现在，欧洲大陆国家及其前殖民地国家以及部分亚非国家等70多个国家属于这一体系，法国是其中的典型代表。

3.伊斯兰法系(又称阿拉伯法系)伊斯兰法系依靠宗教和教会信条来确定法律法规。

例如，沙特阿拉伯信奉严格的穆斯林法律和政治制度，其穆斯林法以宗教领袖解释的《古兰经》的教义和穆斯林法为基础。

大陆法(法律体系)-外文翻译

河北科技师范学院毕业论文外文翻译题目：英美法系与大陆法系的比较研究学生姓名：XXX指导教师：XXX系别：XXX系专业、班级：国际经济与贸易XX级XX班学号：XXXXXXXXXX填表时间：XXXX年XX月XX日河北科技师范学院教务处制Civil law (legal system)Abstract: This article is concerned with the legal system known as Civil law. For the area of law in common law countries governing relations between private individuals, see Civil law (common law).Keywords: Civil law; Common lawIntroductionCivil law, or continental law, is the predominant system of law in the world, with its origins in Roman law, and sets out a comprehensive system of rules, usually codified, which are applied and interpreted by judges. Modern systems are descendants of the nineteenth century codification movement, during which the most important codes (most prominently the Napoleonic Code and the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) came into existence.However, codification is not an essential characteristic of a civil law system. For example, the civil law systems of Scotland and South Africa are not codified, and the civil law systems of Scandinavian countries remain largely not codified. The civil law system is contrasted with the common law originating in England and generally adopted by those countries of the world with a history as British territories or colonies.As a body of laws comprising the official legal system of a nation or state, especially in reference to the rights and privileges of private citizens, civil law becomes the necessary law in which freedom and necessity are unified.OverviewLegal systems across the world. Civil law is blue; other systems are common law (pink), mixed civil and common law (brown), custom (green) and others (yellow).Civil or civilian law is a legal tradition which is the base of the law in the majority of countries of the world, especially in continental Europe and the former Soviet Union, but also inQuebec (Canada), Louisiana (U.S.), Puerto Rico (a U.S. territory), Japan, Latin America, and most former colonies of continental European countries. The Scottish legal system is usually considered to be a mixed system in that Scots law has a basis in Roman law, combining features of both unmodified and Civil law systems. In western and southwestern parts of the U.S., laws in such diverse areas as divorce and water rights show the influence of their Iberian civil law heritage, being based on distinctly different principles from the laws of the northeastern states colonized by settlers with English common law roots.HistoryThe civil law is based on Roman law, especially the Corpus Juris Civilis of Emperor Justinian, as later developed through the Middle Ages by medieval legal scholars.The acceptance of Roman law had different characteristics in different countries. In some of them its effect resulted from legislative act; that is, it became positive law, whereas in other ones it became accepted by way of its processing by legal theorists.Consequently, Roman law did not completely dominate in Europe. Roman law was a secondary source, which was applied only as long as local customs and local laws lacked a pertinent provision on a particular matter. However, local rules too were interpreted primarily according to Roman law (it being a common European legal tradition of sorts), resulting in its influencing the main source of law also.A second characteristic, beyond Roman law foundations, is the extended codification of the adopted Roman law, namely its inclusion into civil codes.The concept of codification developed especially during the seventeenth and eighteenth century, as an expression of both Natural Law and the ideas of the Enlightenment. The political ideal of that era was expressed by the concepts of democracy, protection of property, and the rule of law. That ideal required the creation of certainty of law, through the recording of law and through its uniformity. So, the aforementioned mix of Roman law and customary and local law ceased to exist, and the road opened for law codification, which could contribute to the aims of the above mentioned political ideal.Another factor that contributed to codification was that the notion of the nation state, which was born during the nineteenth century, required the recording of the law that would be applicable to that state.Certainly, there was also reaction to the aim of law codification. The proponents of codification regarded it as conducive to certainty, unity, and systematic recording of the law; whereas its opponents claimed that codification would result in the ossification of the law.Despite resistance, the codification of European private laws moved forward. The French Napoleonic Code of 1804, the German civil code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) of 1900, and the Swiss codes were the most influential national civil codes.Because Germany was a rising power in the late nineteenth century, when many Asian nations were introducing civil law, the German Civil Code became the basis for their legal systems. Thus Japan and South Korea operate under civil law. In China, the German Civil Code was introduced in the later years of the Qing Dynasty and formed the basis of the law of the Peoples' Republic of China, which remains in force.Civil law served as the foundation for socialist law used in Communist countries, with major modifications and additions from Marxist-Leninist ideology. For example, while civil law systems have traditionally put great pains in defining the notion of private property, how it may be acquired, transferred, or lost, Socialist law systems provide for most property to be owned by the state or by agricultural co-operatives, and have special courts and laws for state enterprises. SubgroupsThe term "civil law" as applied to a legal tradition actually originates in English-speaking countries, where it was used to group all non-English legal traditions together and contrast them to the English common law. However, since continental European traditions are by no means uniform, scholars of comparative law usually subdivide civil law into four distinct groups: French civil law: In France, the Benelux countries, Italy, Spain, and former colonies of those countries;German civil law: In Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Greece, Portugal, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, and the Republic of China;Scandinavian civil law: In Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Finland, and Iceland inherited the system from their neighbors.Chinese law is a mixture of civil law and socialist law.Portugal, Brazil, and Italy have evolved from French to German influence, as their nineteenth century civil codes were close to the Napoleonic Code and their twentieth century civil codes are much closer to the German Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. Legal culture and law schools have also come nearer to the German system. The law in these countries is often said to be of a hybrid nature.The Dutch law, or at least the Dutch civil code, cannot be easily placed in one of the mentioned groups either, and it has itself influenced the modern private law of other countries. The Russian civil code is in part a translation of the Dutch one.Civil versus common lawCivil law is primarily contrasted against common law, which is the legal system developed among Anglo-Saxon people, especially in England.The original difference is that, historically, common law was law developed by custom, beginning before there were any written laws and continuing to be applied by courts after there were written laws, too, whereas civil law developed out of the Roman law of Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis.In later times, civil law became codified as druid couturier, or customary law, that were local compilations of legal principles recognized as normative. Sparked by the Age of Enlightenment, attempts to codify private law began during the second half of the eighteenth century, but civil codes with a lasting influence were promulgated only after the French Revolution, in jurisdictions such as France (with its Napoleonic Code), Austria, Quebec, Spain, the Netherlands, and Germany. However, codification is by no means a defining characteristic of a civil law system. For example, the civil law systems of Scandinavian countries remain largely unmodified, whereas common law jurisdictions have frequently codified parts of their laws, such as in the U.S. Uniform Commercial Code. There are also mixed systems, such as the laws of Scotland, Louisiana, Quebec, Namibia, and South Africa.Thus, the difference between civil law and common law lies not just in the mere fact of codification, but in the methodological approach to codes and statutes. In civil law countries, legislation is seen as the primary source of law. By default, courts thus base their judgments on the provisions of codes and statutes, from which solutions in particular cases are to be derived. Courts thus have to reason extensively on the basis of general rules and principles of the code, often drawing analogies from statutory provisions to fill lacunae and to achieve coherence. By contrast, in the common law system, cases are the primary source of law, while statutes are only seen as incursions into the common law and thus interpreted narrowly.The underlying principle of separation of powers is seen somewhat differently in civil law and common law countries. In some common law countries, especially the United States, judges are seen as balancing the power of the other branches of government. By contrast, the original idea of separation of powers in France was to assign different roles to legislation and to judges, with the latter only applying the law. This translates into the fact that many civil law jurisdictions reject the formalistic notion of binding precedent (although paying due consideration to settled case-law), and that certain civil law systems are based upon the inquisitorial system rather than the adversarial system.There are other notable differences between the legal methodologies of various civil law countries. For example, it is often said that common law opinions are much longer and contain elaborate reasoning, whereas legal opinions in civil law countries are usually very short andformal in nature. This is in principle true in France, where judges cite only legislation, but not prior case law. (However, this does not mean that judges do not consider it when drafting opinions.) By contrast, court opinions in German-speaking countries can be as long as English ones, and normally discuss prior cases and academic writing extensively.There are, however, certain sociological differences. Civil law judges are usually trained and promoted separately from attorneys, whereas common law judges are usually selected from accomplished and reputable attorneys. Also, the influence of articles by legal academics on case law tends to be much greater in civil law countries.With respect to criminal procedure, certain civil law systems are based upon a variant of the inquisitorial system rather than the adversarial system. In common law countries, this kind of judicial organization is sometimes criticized as lacking a presumption of innocence. Most European countries, however, are parties to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) adopted under the auspices of the Council of Europe in 1950 to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. Article 6 of the ECHR guarantees "the right to a fair trial" and the presumption of innocence. Some Civil law nations also have legislation that predates the Convention and secures the defendant the presumption of innocence.When the presumption of innocence is present, what distinguishes the inquisitorial system is the frequent lack of a jury of peers, which is guaranteed in many common law jurisdictions. Inquisitorial systems tend to have something akin to a "bench" trial made up of a single judge or a tribunal. Some Scandinavian nations have a tribunal that consists of one civilian and two trained legal professionals. One result of the inquisitorial system's lack of jury trial is a significant difference in the rules of trial evidence. Common law rules of evidence are founded on a concern that juries will misuse, or give inappropriate weight to unreliable evidence. In inquisitorial systems the rules of evidence are sometimes less complicated because legal professionals are considered capable of identifying reliable evidence. Most noteworthy of these is the lack of a hearsay rule.Civil and common law systems also differ considerably in criminal procedure. In general, the judge in a civil law system plays a more active role in determining the facts of the case. Most civil law countries investigate major crimes using the inquisitorial system. Also, civil law systems rely much more on written argument than oral argument.Economic implicationsAccording to legal origins theory, a controversial idea promoted by economists such as Andrei Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, civil law countries tend to emphasize social stability, while common law countries focus on the rights of an individual. The basic thrust of the theory is that common law, as opposed to French civil law, and to a lesser degree to German andScandinavian civil law, is associated with more orientation towards institutions of the market, which is why common law countries tend to be economically more developed.ReferencesDebrusche, Anne-Francoise. 2006. Civil Law Reasoning. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Civil Law Section.Drummond, Susan G. 2007. Civil Law Toronto: Osgoode Hall Law School.Harr, Jonathon. 1995. A Civil Action. New York: Random House. ISBN 0-394-56349-2 Moustaira, Elina N. 2004. Comparative Law: University Courses (in Greek). Athens: Ant. N.Sakkoulas Publishers.大陆法（法律体系）［摘要］本文关注的是称为大陆法体系的法律体系。

世界主要法律体系英美法系

的鱼” ? （6）掌握好询问的时间。 ? （7）运用重复的技巧。提问通常不适宜重复，但有时候也是一种技
巧，以下情况可以应用： A、证人拒绝回答问题，重复提问给证人造成压力，使其难以回避所提出的问题。B、证人语无伦次，重复提问有助于他把思路理清楚。 C、证人对提出的问题没有心理准备或者时间久远记不清楚，变换提问方式可以帮助记忆。 ? （8）制造“法庭陷阱”和警惕对方设置“法庭陷阱”。
应对可能发生的危险提出警告。汽车按设计每小时要走 50 英里，除非轮子安全可靠，产生的伤害几乎是必然的。被告知道危险，他也知道汽车会被购买者之外的第三人使用，这从它的型号就可明显看出：有供三个坐的座位。且从购买者是零售商，他要把买来的汽车转卖出去这一事实也可明显看出：从某些方面可以确定地说，零售商的确不是要使用汽车的人，可被告却要我们承认仅他是法律保护的对象，法律不会让我们得出这样不一致的结论。公共马车时代的先例不再适用今天的交通条件了，危险必须是急迫的这一原则并未改变，但适用这一原则的事物的确会变，不断发展的文明社会生活要求它们是什么，它们就是什么。”
? 诉辩交易在司法实践中还具有以下优点：首先结案快，大大节省了审判资源；其次效率高，是短时间解决案件严重积压问题的良好方式，在没有增加法官、检察官数量的情况下迅速解决了大量的刑事案件；最后，有利于传统意义上的社会公众正义的实现。
? 另一方面，由于欠缺强制起诉的制度，也使检察官对于案件是否起诉有相当大的决定权。
? 另外，犯罪被害人虽然可能可以提起自诉，但是他们对于诉辩交易协议不具有影响能力，这也倾向于鼓励被告进行诉辩交易。
STATE.V.ROJAK
? 20岁的被告人罗杰克利用暑期在一家冰激凌店打工。几个星期以来她一直倾心于隔壁内的一件标价￡69的毛衣，但这个价格已经是其半个多星期的薪水了。终于一天她在查看了商店并认为其能将毛衣拿走后将该毛衣塞进了书包，结果她被商店的保安当场抓获。在后来的司法程序中，检察官向其宣布其犯有零售偷窃罪。面对检察官罗杰克表示认罪，愿意赔偿商店的损失并将毛衣退回，希望得到一个改过自新的机会。检察官根据被告人罗杰克的有罪供述与其达成诉辩交易，对本应关押9个月或罚款￡ 500的最高刑向法官提出了仅罚款￡ 100的建议。在此案件中可以看出对于那些犯罪数额相对较小，系初犯且能够认罪悔罪的被告人采用诉辩交易的方式结案不失为一种双赢的模式。

法律体系

第二，法律体系也是法学体系发展的重要动力。随着法律体系中新的法律内容的增加和扩充，便会促成新的法学体系内容的出现。
第三，法学体系反过来也会成为法律体系发生变化的原因和根据，这表现为两个方面：①法学的研究结果，会促成新的法律的产生，补充和调整原有法律体系的内容和结构②法学关于“法律体系”的学术研究，也会改变原有的法律体系布局和结构，使法律体系重新布局，以适应变化了的客观情势和认识的发展要求。
美国法律
联邦主义是美国宪法的基本原则之一。联邦制的国家结构形式，导致了美国法律体系的庞杂性，本文打算论述美国宪法联邦主义产生的历史背景、联邦主义的原则、联邦法和州法的关系及其体系。
历史背景
美国人民反对英国殖民统治的独立战争的胜利产生的一个极为重要的观念是，耗费如此之多的资源和鲜血进行长期的斗争，就是为了争取自由、保卫自由，美国将成为一个空前的自由乐土，法院的法官很快就在司法实践中贯彻这一原则，根据普遍的自由权利和国家法律，根据自由和正义的观点来判决案件。然而在十八世纪末和十九世纪初，法学家们、政治家们都不适应于美国自由制度的法律。这种自由主义从各方面影响了法律的变革。
中国法律
经济法中国特色社会主义法律体系，是指适应我国社会主义初级阶段的基本国情，与社会主义的根本任务相一致，以宪法为统帅和根本依据，由部门齐全、结构严谨、内部协调、体例科学、调整有效的法律及其配套法规所构成，是保障我们国家沿着中国特色社会主义道路前进的各项法律制度的有机的统一整体。这个体系由法律、行政法规、地方性法规三个层次，宪法及宪法相关法、民法商法、行政法、经济法、社会法、刑法、诉讼与非诉讼程序法七个法律部门组成。
法制体系
法制体系，有时也称法制系统，它同法律体系虽一字之差，但含义不同。法制体系是指法制运转机制和运转环节的全系统，法制体系包括立法体系、执法体系、司法体系、守法体系、法律监督体系等，由这些体系组成的一个纵向的法制运转体系。法律体系着重说明的是呈静态的法律本身的体系构成，而法制体系则既包括静态的法律规范，更着重说明的是呈动态状的法制运转机制系统。从相互关系来讲，法制体系包容着法律体系，而法律体系则组合在法制体系之中。

世界法律体系简介(中英文)

Unit 1 Legal Systems

五大法律体系

法律英语汇总

法律体系legal systems

世界主要法律体系 第四讲英美法系

The Legal System 西方宪法介绍 英文

外国法律制度

世界主要法律体系概要

世界法律体系简介(中英文)

地理了解各国的法律体系和司法制度

世界主要法律体系及其异同

大陆法(法律体系)-外文翻译

世界主要法律体系英美法系

法律体系

世界主要法律体系第四讲英美法系

The Legal System 西方宪法介绍英文