Law vs. The Common Law

Attribute	Law	The Common Law
Origin	Man-made rules and regulations	Developed through judicial decisions and precedents
Application	Enforced by government authorities	Interpreted and applied by judges
Flexibility	Can be changed through legislation	Can evolve over time through judicial decisions
Uniformity	Applies to a specific jurisdiction	Varies between different common law jurisdictions

Definition

Law is a system of rules and guidelines that are enforced through social institutions to govern behavior. It is a set of regulations that are created and enforced by a governing authority. On the other hand, The Common Law refers to a legal system that is based on precedent and custom rather than written statutes. It is a system of law that is developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals.

Source of Authority

In the case of Law, the source of authority is typically a governing body such as a legislature or a parliament. These bodies create laws through a formal process, and these laws are then enforced by the government. In contrast, The Common Law derives its authority from judicial decisions. Judges interpret and apply the law based on precedent, which means that decisions made in previous cases serve as a guide for future cases.

Flexibility

One of the key differences between Law and The Common Law is the level of flexibility in each system. Law is often codified, meaning that it is written down in statutes and regulations. This can make it more rigid and less adaptable to changing circumstances. On the other hand, The Common Law is more flexible because it is based on judicial decisions. Judges have the ability to interpret the law in a way that is responsive to the specific facts of each case.

Development

Law is typically developed through a formal legislative process. Lawmakers propose and debate laws, which are then voted on and enacted. Changes to the law require a similar formal process. In contrast, The Common Law is developed through a process of judicial decision-making. Judges interpret existing laws and apply them to specific cases, creating a body of precedent that shapes future decisions.

Uniformity

Law is often designed to create a uniform set of rules that apply to everyone within a jurisdiction. This can help ensure consistency and predictability in legal outcomes. The Common Law, on the other hand, can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction based on the decisions of individual judges. This can lead to inconsistencies in the application of the law.

Role of Precedent

Precedent plays a central role in The Common Law system. Judges are bound by decisions made in previous cases, known as binding precedent. This means that lower courts must follow the decisions of higher courts. In contrast, precedent is not as central to the Law system. While courts may consider previous decisions, they are not bound by them in the same way that judges in The Common Law system are.

Adaptability

Because The Common Law system relies on judicial decisions, it has the potential to be more adaptable to changing circumstances. Judges can interpret the law in a way that reflects evolving social norms and values. This can be both a strength and a weakness of The Common Law system, as it allows for flexibility but can also lead to uncertainty in the law. Law, on the other hand, may be slower to change but can provide more stability and predictability.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Law and The Common Law are two distinct legal systems with their own attributes and characteristics. While Law is based on formal statutes and regulations created by a governing body, The Common Law relies on judicial decisions and precedent. Each system has its own strengths and weaknesses, with Law providing stability and uniformity, and The Common Law offering flexibility and adaptability. Understanding the differences between these two systems is essential for anyone working within the legal field.