Civil law is codified law distinguished first from canon law and then from common law.One distinguishing characteristic of civil law systems is that they do not consider torts and contracts as separate areas of law but view them together as the law of obligations, although this is different from commercial law. The adjective civil law describes that which is the basis of the civil code tradition usual in continental Europe and several other parts of the globe as distinguished from the common law tradition which is the foundation of Anglo-American legal systems (Rossini, 7).
Importance of the study of USA civil law
This reading is being directed to show that the study of civil government will assist to make English law more of a system and science than it is now, and to train the individual lawyer in more philosophical habits of mind, proceeds upon the assumption that law ought to be a science and advocates rational. To prove the truth of this hypothesis would involve a discussion of the relations of theory and practice generally, and here, at least, no such proof can be needed. Science, like wisdom, is justified of all her children and those who, in the teeth of what we have seen during the late eight months, persist in holding the theory to be necessarily a hindrance to practice. It would quite consistently; refuse to be an influence of any such general considerations as those which determine academic opinion. The second advantage is the automatic effect upon the legal position of a higher conception of the studies to which it devotes its labors. The complaint is often an understanding that men of liberty culture and refined taste rise more rarely than earlier to the highest places at the bar and on the bench, that it is now private connections rather than the finer gifts of intellect and charter which open the path to professional success. The life of a lawyer, tedious and painful in so many of its details, would be a happier one if his profession called out. As it ought to do, the essential faculties of his mind and the nature of the declaration, which will sooner or later be endangered here by the provocations, will be best maintained in purity by a judgment of the honor of the subject it deals with as department of philosophical enquiry. It is hardly possible that a contaminated department of justice can coincide with an enthusiasm for the abstract propriety and dignity of law as a science, such as existed among the great lawyers of Rome (Bryce, 36).
Among all the branches of the legislature, the civil code is that which grants the fewest holds to those who do not study the law as an occupation. This declaration is not robustenough since this branch has previouslyalmoststimulated a species of aversion. Inquisitivenesshas for an extended periodpassionatelybeen the focus of the thought of political budget, punitive law and the doctrines of government. But the civil code has not ever yet approved the vague bounds of the Bar. Its criticsspend in the libraries, by the side of theirenemies. The public is unaware even of the titles of the denominations that separate them and regard with a silent respect the various folios, the enormousgatherings, decorated with the arrogantlabels of Body of Laws and Universal Jurisprudence. The civil system is at the end only the punitive code under another feature. It is impossible to comprehend the one, devoid of understanding the other. The formation of rights is the permitting of approvals and the delivering of bans. In a word, it is the creation of crimes. To execute an offence is, instead to violate aresponsibility and alternatively a right. The Civil ruleis thus only penal law taken into under another facet. If one considers the law at the instant, it consults a right or executes aduty. If onecontemplates the law in its authorizations, in it consequences, with esteem to a desecrated right or damaged obligation, it is in a penal opinion (Tait,300).
PRINCIPLES OF CIVIL LAW
Over time, some legal principles and doctrines have evolved and are employed to a greater or lesser extent by the courts of various nations to resolve or reduce conflicts that involve a foreign element. The three important legal principles discussed below are with courtesy and respect and are in the interests of maintaining harmonious relations among nations 462).
1. The Principle Of Comity
This policy refers to legal reciprocity. One state will comply and give effect to the administrator, legislative and judicial acts of another country, as long as the laws are consistent with the law and public policy of the accommodating nation. For instance, the U.S government will recognize and enforce a default judgement from an Australian court because the legal procedures in Australia are compatible with those in the United States. Nearly all countries recognize the validity of marriage decrees issues in another country.
2. The Act Of State Doctrine
This act provides that the administrative branch of one homeland will not examine the legality of public actions performed by a distinguished foreign government within the latter's property. The act of state regulation can have significant consequences for individuals and firms doing business with, and investing in other countries. This principle is frequently useful in cases involving expropriation or confiscation.
3. The Doctrine Of Sovereign Immunity
When several conditions are proved, the doctrine of monarch immunity exempts foreign nations from the jurisdiction of the U.S courts. In 1976, Government codified this rule in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities ACT. The FSIA ultimately governs the circumstances in which inaction may be brought in the United States against a foreign nation's property. Because the law is jurisdiction is nature, a plaintiff has the burden of showing that a defendant is not entitled to sovereign immunity.
COMPARISON WITH COMMON LAW
If you are trading with a state that follows the civil law system, you will probably find a well-developed court system. However, you may conclude that the public legislation of that country is less developed or less favorable to your interests than the U.S common law. One will also discover some vital disparities. The court in civil law state may be authorized by statute to accept jurisdiction over any suit brought by a national of the country, regardless of whether the suit involves a foreigner or a transaction in that state. A court may take jurisdiction even if the alien is absent. Thus, even if one contracts with a supplier's country is a fixed or under for goods, our supplier could still sue that person overseas. Under U.S common law, the concept of jurisdiction is more limited. U.s courts require a closer connection between the place where a suit is brought and the defendant. The civil law system did not original establish specific rules for calculating damages in breach of contract cases, and many civil law states have not yet clearly defined standards for this purpose. Some damages that a court may award can, therefore, be difficult to predict. Consequently, plaintiffs in civil law state commonly sue for the real or specific performance of the contract. This remedy needs the seller to deliver the goods and the buyer to remit payment as required by their contract. If the vendor cannot deliver the goods, the buyer is awarded the greater of the contract price or the cost of replacement (Hinkelman, 123).