82,891
edits
Civil law: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
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 |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| 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, and poroine to use words like [[synallagmatic]] and [[aleatory]]. Their [[netting opinion]]s are marathon exercises in spite. 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]], But the continentals will shrug and speak of Robespierre and Hannibal’s trek over the alps. Different strokes for different folks. | ||
{{ | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Common law]] | *[[Common law]] | ||
*[[Civil law jurisdiction]]s | *[[Civil law jurisdiction]]s | ||
*[[Common law jurisdiction]]s | *[[Common law jurisdiction]]s | ||