Civil law: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "The continental way of doing law. Less emphasis on precedent, they're in denial about the existence of trusts, but otherwise sensible, if long-winde..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The continental way of doing law. Less emphasis on [[precedent]], | {{g}}The continental way of doing law. Derives, they will claim, from Julius Caesar and the romance tradition, but basically means a lot of [[legislation]]. Less emphasis on [[precedent]], they’re in denial about the existence of [[contrat fiduciaire|trusts]], but otherwise sensible, if long-winded. You may prefer the [[common law]] if, like us, you are tickled by the idea that the entire law of civil wrongs can be derived from a [[Donoghue v Stevenson - Case Note|rotten snail in a bottle of ginger-beer]]. | ||
{{seealso}} | {{seealso}} | ||
Revision as of 14:11, 15 June 2019
|
The continental way of doing law. Derives, they will claim, from Julius Caesar and the romance tradition, but basically means a lot of legislation. Less emphasis on precedent, they’re in denial about the existence of trusts, but otherwise sensible, if long-winded. You may prefer the common law if, like us, you are tickled by the idea that the entire law of civil wrongs can be derived from a rotten snail in a bottle of ginger-beer.