Law: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Yannismarou (talk | contribs) correction |
Savagepine (talk | contribs) ←Replaced page with '=PENIS=' |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=PENIS= |
|||
{{otheruses}} |
|||
[[Image:JMR-Memphis1.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Lady Justice]] or Justitia is a personification of the moral force that underlies the legal system (particularly in Western art). Her blindfold symbolises [[equality]] under the law through impartiality towards its subjects, the weighing scales represent the [[balance (metaphysics)|balancing]] of people's interests under the law, and her sword denotes the law's force of [[reason]] and the power of the sovereign to enforce the law.]] |
|||
'''Law'''<ref>From [[Old English]] ''lagu'' "something laid down or fixed"; ''legal'' comes from [[Latin]] ''legalis'', from ''[[translating "law" to other European languages|lex]]'' "law", "statute" ([http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=law&searchmode=none Law], Online Etymology Dictionary; [http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/legal Legal], Mirriam-Webster's Online Dictionary)</ref> is a system of rules usually enforced through a set of institutions.<ref>Robertson, ''Crimes against humanity'', 90; see [[jurisprudence]] for extensive debate on what law is; [[H.L.A Hart]] argued law is a "system of rules" in his work ''[[The Concept of Law]]'' (Campbell, ''The Contribution of Legal Studies'', 184); [[John Austin]] said law was "the command of a sovereign, backed by the threat of a sanction" (Bix, [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/austin-john/#3 John Austin]); Ronald Dworkin describes law as an "interpretive concept" to achieve [[justice]] (Dworkin, ''Law's Empire'', 410); and [[Joseph Raz]] argues law is an "authority" to mediate people's interests (Raz, ''The Authority of Law'', 3–36).</ref> Law affects everyday life and society in a variety of ways. [[Contract law]] regulates everything from buying a bus ticket to trading [[swaption]]s on a [[derivative (finance)|derivatives market]]. [[Property law]] defines rights and obligations related to buying, selling, or renting [[real property]] such as homes and buildings. [[Trust law]] applies to assets held for investment, such as pension funds. [[Tort]] law allows claims for compensation when someone or their [[property]] is [[harm principle|harmed]]. But if the harm is criminalised, and the act is [[intention (criminal)|intentional]], [[criminal law]] offers means to prosecute and punish the perpetrator. [[Constitutional law]] provides a framework for creating laws, protecting people's [[human rights]], and [[election|electing]] [[politics|political]] representatives, while [[administrative law]] allows ordinary citizens to challenge the way governments exercise power. [[International law]] regulates affairs between sovereign [[nation-state]]s in everything from [[trade]] to the [[natural environment|environment]] to [[military]] action. "The [[rule of law]]", wrote the [[Ancient Greece|ancient Greek]] philosopher [[Aristotle]] in 350 BC, "is better than the rule of any individual."<ref>n.b. this translation reads, "it is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens" (Aristotle, ''Politics'' [[s:Politics (Aristotle)/Book 3#3:16|3.16]]).</ref> |
|||
[[Legal systems of the world|Legal systems]] around the world elaborate legal [[right]]s and responsibilities in different ways. A basic distinction is made between [[Civil law (legal system)|civil law]] [[jurisdiction]]s and systems using [[common law]]. Some countries base their law on [[religious law|religious scripts]]. Scholars investigate the nature of law through many perspectives, including [[legal history]] and [[jurisprudence|philosophy]], or [[social sciences]] such as [[economic analysis of law|economics]] and [[sociology of law|sociology]]. The study of law raises important questions about [[egalitarianism|equality]], [[fairness]] and [[justice]], which are not always simple. "In its majestic equality", said the author [[Anatole France]] in 1894, "the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread."<ref>The original French is: "la loi, dans un grand souci d'égalité, interdit aux riches comme aux pauvres de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain" (France, ''The Red Lilly'', [http://www.online-literature.com/anatole-france/red-lily/7/ Chapter VII]).</ref> The most important institutions for law are the [[judiciary]], the [[legislature]], the [[executive (government)|executive]], its [[bureaucracy]], the [[military]] and [[police]], the [[lawyer|legal profession]] and [[civil society]]. |
|||
==Legal subjects== |
|||
Though all legal systems deal usually with the same or similar issues, different countries often categorise and name legal subjects in different ways. Quite common is the distinction between "[[public law]]" subjects, which relate closely to the [[state]] (including constitutional, administrative and criminal law), and "[[private law]]" subjects (including contract, tort, property).<ref>Although some scholars argue that "the boundaries between public and private law are becoming blurres," and that this distinction has become mere "folklore" (Bergkamp, ''Liability and Environment'', 1-2).</ref> In [[civil law(legal system)|civil law]] systems, contract and tort fall under a general [[law of obligations]] and trusts law is dealt with under statutory regimes or [[Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition|international conventions]]. [[International law|International]], [[constitutional law|constitutional]] and [[administrative law]], [[criminal law]], contract, tort, property law and [[trust law|trusts]] are regarded as the "traditional core subjects",<ref>e.g. in England these seven subjects, except with [[EU law]] instead of international law, are required knowledge for legal practice. Outside the [[European Union|EU]], students may focus on other regional organisations, such as [[North American Free Trade Agreement|NAFTA]], [[South Asia Free Trade Agreement|SAFTA]], [[South American Community of Nations|CSN]], [[ASEAN]] or the [[African Union]]</ref> although there are many [[Law#Further disciplines|further disciplines]] which might be of greater practical importance. |
|||
===International law=== |
|||
{{Main|Public international law|Conflict of laws|European Union law}} |
|||
[[Image:Naciones_Unidas_3.jpg|right|thumb|Providing a constitution for public international law, the United Nations was conceived during World War II.]] |
|||
In a global economy, law is [[globalization|globalising]] too. International law can refer to three things: public international law, private international law or conflict of laws and the law of supranational organisations. |
|||
*'''[[Public international law]]''' concerns relationships between sovereign nations. It has a special status as law because there is no international police force, and courts lack the capacity to penalise disobedience.<ref>The prevailing manner of enforcing international law is still essentially "self help"; that is the reaction by states to alleged breaches of international obligations by other states (Robertson, ''Crimes against Humanity'', 90; Shermers-Blokker, ''International Institutional Law'', 900–901).</ref> The [[Sources of international law|sources]] for public international law to develop are [[Custom (law)|custom]], practice and treaties between sovereign nations. The [[United Nations]], founded under the [[United Nations Charter|UN Charter]] and the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]], is the most important international organisation, established after the [[Treaty of Versailles]]'s failure and [[World War II]]. Other international agreements, like the [[Geneva Conventions]] on the conduct of [[war]], and international bodies such as the [[International Court of Justice]], [[International Labour Organization|International Labour Organisation]], the [[World Trade Organization|World Trade Organisation]], or the [[International Monetary Fund]], also form a growing part of public international law. |
|||
* '''[[Conflict of laws]]''' (or "private international law" in [[civil law (legal system)|civil law]] countries) concerns which [[jurisdiction]] a legal dispute between private parties should be heard in and which jurisdiction's law should be applied. Today, businesses are increasingly capable of shifting [[capital]] and [[labour (economics)|labour]] supply chains across borders, as well as trading with overseas businesses. This increases the number of disputes outside a unified legal framework and the enforceability of standard practices. Increasing numbers of businesses opt for commercial arbitration under the [[Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards|New York Convention 1958]]. |
|||
* '''[[European Union law]]''' is the first and only example of a [[supranational law|supranational legal framework]]. However, given increasing global economic integration, many regional agreements—especially the [[South American Community of Nations]]—are on track to follow the same model. In the EU, sovereign nations have pooled their authority through a system of [[European Court of Justice|courts]] and [[European Parliament|political institutions]]. They have the ability to enforce legal norms against and for member states and citizens, in a way that public international law does not.<ref>Shermers-Blokker, ''International Institutional Law'', 943</ref> As the European Court of Justice said in 1962, European Union law constitutes "a new legal order of international law" for the mutual social and economic benefit of the member states.<ref>[http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61962J0026:EN:HTML C-26/62 ''Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlanse Administratie Der Belastingen''], Eur-Lex</ref> |
|||
===Constitutional and administrative law=== |
|||
{{Main|Constitutional law|Administrative law}} |
|||
[[Image:Declaration of Human Rights.jpg|thumb|left|The French [[Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen]], whose principles still have constitutional value]] |
|||
Constitutional and administrative law govern the affairs of the state. [[Constitutional law]] concerns both the relationships between the [[executive (government)|executive]], [[legislature]] and [[judiciary]] and the [[human rights]] or [[civil liberties]] of individuals against the state. Most jurisdictions, like the [[Law of the United States|United States]] and [[Law of France|France]], have a single codified constitution, with a [[Bill of Rights]]. A few, like the [[Law of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom]], have no such document; in those jurisdictions the constitution is composed of [[statute]], [[case law]] and [[constitutional conventions|convention]]. A case named ''[[Entick v. Carrington]]''<ref>''[[Entick v. Carrington]]'' (1765) 19 Howell's State Trials 1030</ref> illustrates a constitutional principle deriving from the common law. Mr Entick's house was searched and ransacked by Sheriff Carrington. When Mr Entick complained in court, Sheriff Carrington argued that a warrant from a Government minister, the [[George Montague-Dunk, 2nd Earl of Halifax|Earl of Halifax]], was valid authority. However, there was no written statutory provision or court authority. The leading judge, [[Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden|Lord Camden]], stated that, |
|||
<blockquote>"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property. That right is preserved sacred and incommunicable in all instances, where it has not been taken away or abridged by some public law for the good of the whole… If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment."</blockquote> |
|||
The fundamental constitutional principle, inspired by [[Two Treatises of Government|John Locke]],<ref>Locke, ''The Second Treatise'', [[s:Two Treatises of Government/The Second Treatise of Government: An Essay Concerning the True Origin, Extent, and End of Civil Government#2:9|Chapter 9, section 124]]</ref> is that the individual can do anything but that which is forbidden by law, and the state may do nothing but that which is authorised by law. [[Administrative law]] is the chief method for people to hold state bodies to account. People can apply for [[judicial review]] of actions or decisions by local councils, public services or government ministries, to ensure that they comply with the law. The first specialist administrative court was the ''[[Conseil d'État]]'' set up in 1799, as [[Napoleon I of France|Napoleon]] assumed power in [[France]].<ref name="A75">Auby, ''Administrative Law in France'', 75</ref> |
|||
===Criminal law=== |
|||
{{Main|Criminal law}} |
|||
[[Image:SalemWitchcraftTrial.jpg|thumb|right|A depiction of a 1600s criminal [[trial]], for [[witchcraft]] in [[Salem witch trials|Salem]]]] |
|||
Criminal law is the body of law that defines criminal offences and the penalties for convicted offenders.<ref name="BrCr">{{cite encyclopedia|title=Criminal law|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica}}</ref> Apprehending, charging, and trying suspected offenders is regulated by the law of [[criminal procedure]].<ref name="BrPr">{{cite encyclopedia|title=Procedural law|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica}}</ref> In every jurisdiction, a crime is committed where two elements are fulfilled. First, the criminal must have the requisite [[intention (criminal)|malicious intent]] to do a criminal act, or ''[[mens rea]]'' (guilty mind). Second, he must commit the criminal act, or ''[[actus reus]]'' (guilty act). Examples of different kinds of crime include [[murder]], [[assault]], [[fraud]] or [[theft]]. In exceptional circumstances, defences can exist to some crimes, such as killing in [[self-defense (theory)|self defence]], or pleading [[insanity defense|insanity]]. Another example is in the 19th century English case of [[Regina v. Dudley and Stephens|''R v. Dudley and Stephens'']],<ref>''[[Regina v. Dudley and Stephens]]'' ([1884] 14 QBD 273 DC)</ref> which tested a defence of "[[necessity]]". The ''Mignotte'', sailing from [[Southampton]] to [[Sydney]], sank. Three crew members and a cabin boy were stranded on a raft. They were starving and the cabin boy close to death. Driven to extreme hunger, the crew killed and [[cannibalism|ate]] the cabin boy. The crew survived and were rescued, but put on trial for murder. They argued it was necessary to kill the cabin boy to preserve their own lives. [[John Coleridge, 1st Baron Coleridge|Lord Coleridge]], expressing immense disapproval, ruled, "to preserve one's life is generally speaking a duty, but it may be the plainest and the highest duty to sacrifice it." The men were sentenced to [[hanging|hang]], but public opinion, especially among seafarers, was outraged and overwhelmingly supportive of the crew's right to preserve their own lives. In the end, the [[Royal prerogative|Crown]] commuted their sentences to six months. |
|||
Criminal law offences are viewed as offences against not just individual victims, but the community as well.<ref name="BrCr" /> The state, usually with the help of police, takes the lead in prosecution, which is why in common law countries cases are cited as "''The People'' v. …" or "''R.'' (for [[Rex]] or [[Regina]]) v. …" Also, lay [[jury|juries]] are often used to determine the guilt of defendants on points of fact: juries cannot change legal rules. Some developed countries still have [[capital punishment]] and [[corporal punishment]] for criminal activity, but the normal punishment for a crime will be [[prison|imprisonment]], [[fine]]s, state supervision (such as probation), or [[community service]]. Modern criminal law has been affected considerably by the social sciences, especially with respect to [[sentence (law)|sentencing]], legal research, legislation, and [[rehabilitation (penology)|rehabilitation]].<ref name="BrCr" /> On the international field, 104 countries have signed the enabling treaty for the [[International Criminal Court]], which was established to try people for [[crime against humanity|crimes against humanity]].<ref>[http://www.icc-cpi.int/statesparties.html The States Parties to the Rome Statute], International Criminal Court</ref> |
|||
===Contract=== |
|||
{{Main|Contract}} |
|||
[[Image:carbolic_smoke_ball_co.jpg|thumb|left|The Carbolic Smoke Ball offer, which [[bankruptcy|bankrupted]] the Co. because it could not fulfill the terms it advertised]] |
|||
Contract is based on the Latin phrase ''[[pacta sunt servanda]]'' (agreements must be kept).<ref>Wenberg, ''Pacta Sunt Servanda'', 775</ref> Contracts can be simple everyday buying and selling or complex multi-party agreements. They can be made orally (e.g. buying a newspaper) or in writing (e.g. signing a contract of employment). Sometimes [[statute of frauds|formalities]], such as writing the contract down or having it [[witness]]ed, are required for the contract to take effect (e.g. when buying a house).<ref>e.g. In England, s.52 Law of Property Act 1925</ref> |
|||
In common law jurisdictions, there are three key elements to the creation of a contract. These are [[offer and acceptance]], [[consideration]] and an intention to create legal relations. For example, in ''[[Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company]]'' a medical firm advertised that its new wonder drug, the smokeball, would cure people's [[influenza|flu]], and if it did not, buyers would get [[pound sterling|£]]100.<ref name="CCSBC">''Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company'' [[Case citation|[1893] 1 QB 256]]. See a full law report from [http://www.justis.com/titles/iclr_r9321042.html Justis].</ref> Many people sued for their £100 when the drug did not work. Fearing [[bankruptcy]], Carbolic argued the advert was not to be taken as a serious, legally binding offer. It was merely an [[invitation to treat]], or mere puff, a gimmick. But the court of appeal held that to a [[reasonable man]] Carbolic had made a serious offer. People had given good "consideration" for it by going to the "distinct inconvenience" of using a faulty product. "Read the advertisement how you will, and twist it about as you will", said [[Nathaniel Lindley, Baron Lindley|Lord Justice Lindley]], "here is a distinct promise expressed in language which is perfectly unmistakable".<ref name="CCSBC" /> |
|||
"Consideration" means all parties to a contract must exchange something of value to be able to enforce it. Some common law systems, like [[Law of Australia|Australia]], are moving away from consideration as a requirement for a contract. The concept of [[estoppel]] or ''culpa in contrahendo'' can be used to create obligations during pre-contractual negotiations.<ref>''Austotel v. Franklins'' (1989) 16 NSWLR 582</ref> In [[civil law]] jurisdictions, consideration is not a requirement for a contract at all.<ref>e.g. In Germany, [http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/311.html § 311 Abs. II] [[Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch|BGB]]</ref> In [[Law of France|France]], an ordinary contract is said to form simply on the basis of a "meeting of the minds" or a "concurrence of wills". [[Law of Germany|Germany]] has a special approach to contracts, which ties into property law. Their 'abstraction principle' (''Abstraktionsprinzip'') means that the personal obligation of contract forms separately from the title of property being conferred. When contracts are invalidated for some reason (e.g. a car buyer is so drunk that he lacks legal capacity to contract)<ref>[http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/105.html § 105 Abs. II] [[Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch|BGB]]</ref> the contractual obligation to pay can be invalidated separately from the proprietary title of the car. [[Unjust enrichment]] law, rather than contract law, is then used to restore title to the rightful owner.<ref>Smith, ''The Structure of Unjust Enrichment Law'', 1037</ref> |
|||
===Tort=== |
|||
{{Main|Tort}} |
|||
[[Image:Big mcspotlaunch.jpg|thumb|right|The "[[McLibel case|McLibel]]" two were involved in the longest running case in UK history for publishing a pamphlet criticising [[McDonald's]] restaurants]] |
|||
Torts, sometimes called [[delict]]s, are civil wrongs. To have acted tortiously, one must have breached a duty to another person, or infringed some pre-existing legal right. A simple [[Bolton v. Stone|example]] might be accidentally hitting someone with a cricket ball.<ref>''[[Bolton v. Stone]]'' [1951] A.C. 850</ref> Under [[negligence]] law, the most common form of tort, the injured party can make a claim against the party responsible for the injury. The principles of negligence are illustrated by ''[[Donoghue v. Stevenson]]''.<ref name="DvS">''[[Donoghue v. Stevenson]]'' ([[Case citation#England and Wales|[1932] A.C. 532, 1932 S.C. (H.L.) 31, [1932] All ER Rep 1]]). See the original text of the case in [http://www.leeds.ac.uk/law/hamlyn/donoghue.htm UK Law Online].</ref> Mrs Donoghue ordered an opaque bottle of [[ginger beer]] in a café in [[Paisley]]. Having consumed half of it, she poured the remainder into a tumbler. The decomposing remains of a dead [[snail]] floated out. She fell ill and sued the manufacturer for carelessly allowing the drink to be contaminated. The [[House of Lords]] decided that the manufacturer was liable for Mrs Donoghue's illness. [[James Atkin, Baron Atkin|Lord Atkin]] took a distinctly moral approach, and said, |
|||
<blockquote>"The liability for negligence… is no doubt based upon a general public sentiment of moral wrongdoing for which the offender must pay… The rule that you are to love your neighbour becomes in law, you must not injure your neighbour; and the lawyer's question, Who is my neighbour? receives a restricted reply. You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour."<ref>''[[Donoghue v. Stevenson]]'' [1932] A.C. 532, 580</ref></blockquote> |
|||
This became the basis for the four principles of negligence; (1) Mr Stevenson owed Mrs Donoghue a [[duty of care]] to provide safe drinks (2) he [[Breach of duty in English law|breached]] his duty of care (3) the harm would not have occurred [[causation (law)|but for]] his breach and (4) his act was the [[proximate cause]], or not too [[remoteness|remote]] a consequence, of her harm.<ref name="DvS" /> Another example of tort might be a neighbour making excessively loud noises with machinery on his property.<ref>''Sturges v. Bridgman'' (1879) 11 Ch D 852</ref> Under a [[nuisance]] claim the noise could be stopped. Torts can also involve intentional acts, such as [[assault (tort)|assault]], [[battery (tort)|battery]] or [[trespass]]. A better known tort is [[slander and libel|defamation]], which occurs, for example, when a newspaper makes unsupportable allegations that damage a politician's reputation.<ref>e.g. concerning a British politician and the Iraq War, ''[[George Galloway|Galloway]] v. Telegraph Group Ltd'' [2004] EWHC 2786</ref> More infamous are economic torts, which form the basis of [[labour law]] in some countries by making trade unions liable for strikes,<ref>''[[Taff Vale Railway Co. v. Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants]]'' [1901] AC 426</ref> when statute does not provide immunity.<ref>In the U.K., [[Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992]]; c.f. in the U.S., [[National Labor Relations Act]]</ref> |
|||
===Property law=== |
|||
{{Main|Property law}} |
|||
[[Image:South Sea Bubble.jpg|left|thumb|A painting of the [[South Sea Bubble]], one of the world's first ever [[speculation]]s and crashes, led to strict regulation on share trading]] |
|||
Property law governs everything that people call 'theirs'. [[Real property]], sometimes called 'real estate' refers to ownership of land and things attached to it.<ref>{{cite web | title=''Hunter v. Canary Wharf Ltd.'' (1997) 2 AllER 426 | url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199697/ldjudgmt/jd970424/hunter01.htm}}</ref> [[Personal property]], refers to everything else; movable objects, such as computers and sandwiches, or intangible rights, such as [[share (finance)|stocks and shares]]. A right 'in rem' is a right to a specific piece of property. If an individual loses his computer and another finds it and it changes hands, a right in rem gives the individual the ability to take the computer from whoever has it. A right 'in personam' however is a right against one specific individual for something equivalent to the property in question. If an individual loses his computer and it passes hands, the right in personam allows the individual to claim the price of the computer from the thief (but not the actual computer, as this might now belong to someone else.) The classic civil law approach to property, propounded by [[Friedrich Carl von Savigny]], is that it is a right good against the world. This contrasts to an obligation, like a contract or tort, which is a right good between individuals.<ref>Savigny. ''Das Recht des Besitzes'', [http://dlib-pr.mpier.mpg.de/m/kleioc/0010/exec/bigpage/%22235083_00000057%22 25]</ref> Preferred in common law jurisdictions is an idea closer to an obligation; that the person who can show the best claim to a piece of property, against any contesting party, is the owner.<ref>P. Matthews, ''The Man of Property'', 251–274</ref> The idea of [[property]] raises important philosophical and political issues. [[John Locke]] famously argued that our "lives, liberties and estates" are our property because we own our bodies and [[Labour theory of property|mix our labour]] with our surroundings.<ref>Locke, ''Second Treatise on Civil Government'', [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Two_Treatises_of_Government/The_Second_Treatise_of_Government:_An_Essay_Concerning_the_True_Origin%2C_Extent%2C_and_End_of_Civil_Government#Chap._IX._Of_the_Ends_of_Political_Society_and_Government. Chapter 9, section 123].</ref> The idea of privately owned property is still contentious. French philosopher [[Pierre Proudhon]] once famously wrote, "property is theft".<ref>Proudhon, ''What is Property?'', [http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext95/pprty10.txt Chapter I (Method Pursued in this Book – The Idea of a Revolution)]</ref> |
|||
Land law forms the basis for most kinds of property law, and is the most complex. It concerns [[mortgage]]s, [[leasehold estate|rental agreements]], [[license|licences]], [[covenant]]s, [[easement]]s and the statutory systems for registration of land. Regulations on the use of personal property fall under [[intellectual property]], [[company (law)|company law]], [[trust law|trusts]] and [[commercial law]]. |
|||
===Trusts and equity=== |
|||
{{Main|Trust law|Equity}} |
|||
[[Image:Court of Chancery edited.jpg|thumb|right|The [[Court of Chancery]], London, early 19th century]] |
|||
Equity is a body of rules that developed in England separately from the "common law". The common law was administered by judges, whilst the [[Lord Chancellor]], as the King's keeper of conscience, could overrule the judge made law if he thought it equitable to do so.<ref>McGhee, ''Snell's Equity'', 7</ref> This meant equity came to operate more through [[Maxims of equity|principles]] than rigid rules. For instance, whereas neither the common law nor civil law systems allow people to split the ownership from the control of one piece of property, equity allows this through an arrangement known as a 'trust'. 'Trustees' control property, whereas the 'beneficial' (or 'equitable') ownership of trust property is held by people known as 'beneficiaries'. Trustees owe duties to their beneficiaries to take good care of the trust.<ref>c.f. ''Bristol and West Building Society v. Mothew'' [1998] Ch 1</ref> In the early case of ''Keech v. Sandford''<ref>''Keech v. Sandford'' (1726) Sel Cas. Ch.61</ref> a child had inherited the [[lease]] on a [[Romford Market|market]] in [[Romford]], London. Mr Sandford was entrusted to look after this property until the child matured. But before then, the lease expired. The landlord had (apparently) told Mr Sandford that he did not want the child to have the renewed lease. Yet the landlord was happy (apparently) to give Mr Sandford the opportunity of the lease instead. Mr Sandford took it. When the child (now Mr Keech) grew up, he sued Mr Sandford for the profit that he had been making by getting the market's lease. Mr Sandford was meant to be trusted, but he put himself in a position of [[conflict of interest]]. The Lord Chancellor, [[Earl of Lovelace|Lord King]], agreed and ordered Mr Sandford should disgorge his profits. He wrote, |
|||
<blockquote>"I very well see, if a trustee, on the refusal to renew, might have a lease to himself few trust-estates would be renewed… This may seem very hard, that the trustee is the only person of all mankind who might not have the lease; but it is very proper that the rule should be strictly pursued and not at all relaxed."<ref>''Keech v. Sandford'' (1726) Sel Cas. Ch.61</ref></blockquote> |
|||
Of course, Lord King LC was worried that trustees might exploit opportunities to use trust property for themselves instead of looking after it. Business speculators using trusts had just recently caused a [[South Sea Bubble|stock market crash]]. Strict duties for trustees made their way into company law and were applied to directors and [[chief executive officer]]s. Another example of a trustee's duty might be to invest property wisely or sell it.<ref>''Nestle v. National Westminster Bank plc'' [1993] 1 WLR 1260</ref> This is especially the case for [[pension]] funds, the most important form of trust, where investors are trustees for people's savings until [[retirement]]. But trusts can also be set up for [[charitable trust|charitable purposes]], famous examples being the [[British Museum]] or the [[Rockefeller Foundation]]. |
|||
===Further disciplines=== |
|||
Law spreads far beyond the core subjects into virtually every area of life. Three categories are presented for convenience, though the subjects intertwine and flow into one another.<!-- mixed metaphor --> |
|||
;Law and society |
|||
[[Image:UnisonStrikeRallyOxford20060328 KaihsuTai.jpg|thumb|right|A trade union protest by [[UNISON]] while on strike]] |
|||
* '''[[Labour law]]''' is the study of a tripartite industrial relationship between worker, employer and [[trade union]]. This involves [[collective bargaining]] regulation, and the right to [[strike action|strike]]. Individual employment law refers to workplace rights, such as [[Occupational safety and health|health and safety]] or a [[minimum wage]]. |
|||
* '''[[Human rights]]''' and [[human rights law]] are important fields to guarantee everyone basic freedoms and entitlements. These are laid down in codes such as the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]], the [[European Convention on Human Rights]] and the [[United States Bill of Rights|U.S. Bill of Rights]]. |
|||
* '''[[Civil procedure]]''' and '''[[criminal procedure]]''' concern the rules that courts must follow as a [[trial]] and appeals proceed. Both concern everybody's [[right to a fair trial]] or hearing. |
|||
* '''[[Evidence (law)|Evidence]]''' law involves which materials are admissible in courts for a case to be built. |
|||
* '''[[Immigration law]]''' and '''[[nationality law]]''' concern the rights of foreigners to live and work in a nation-state that is not their own and to acquire or lose [[citizenship]]. Both also involve the [[right of asylum]] and the problem of [[statelessness|stateless]] individuals. |
|||
* '''[[Social security]]''' law refers to the rights people have to social insurance, such as jobseekers' allowances or housing benefits. |
|||
* '''[[Family law]]''' covers [[marriage]] and [[divorce]] proceedings, the rights of children and of course the rights to property and money in the event of separation. |
|||
;Law and commerce |
|||
[[Image:NYSE-floor.jpg|thumb|right|The [[New York Stock Exchange]] trading floor]] |
|||
* '''[[Commercial law]]''' covers complex contract and property law. The law of [[agency (law)|agency]], [[insurance law]], [[negotiable instrument|bills of exchange]], [[insolvency]] and [[bankruptcy law]] and sales law are all important, and trace back to the mediæval ''[[Law Merchant|Lex Mercatoria]]''. The UK Sale of Goods Acts and the U.S. [[Uniform Commercial Code]] are examples of codified common law commercial principles. |
|||
* '''[[Company law]]''' sprung from the law of trusts, on the principle of separating ownership of property and control.<ref>Berle, ''Modern Corporation and Private Property''</ref> The law of the modern [[company (law)|company]] began with the ''Joint Stock Companies Act'', passed in the [[United Kingdom]] in 1865, which protected investors with [[limited liability]] and conferred [[separate legal personality]]. |
|||
* '''[[Intellectual property]]''' deals with [[patent]]s, [[trademark]]s and [[copyright]]s. These are intangible assets: the right to protect your invention from imitation, your brand name from appropriation, or a song you wrote from performance and plagiarism. |
|||
*'''[[Restitution]]''' deals with the recovery of someone else's gain, rather than [[compensation]] for one's own loss. |
|||
* '''[[Unjust enrichment]]''' is law covering a right to retrieve property from someone that has profited unjustly at another's expense. |
|||
;Law and regulation |
|||
[[Image:1930-67B.gif|thumb|right|The [[New York Stock Exchange]] trading floor after the [[Wall Street Crash of 1929]], before tougher [[banking regulation]] was introduced]] |
|||
* '''[[Tax law]]''' is probably the most complicated and well-paid discipline, involving [[value added tax]], [[corporate tax]], [[income tax]], and most importantly, lots of money. |
|||
* '''[[Bank regulation|Banking law]]''' and [[financial regulation]] set minimum standards on the amounts of capital banks must hold, and rules about best practice for investment. This is to insure against the risk of economic crises, such as the [[Wall Street Crash of 1929]]. |
|||
* '''[[Regulated market|Regulated industries]]''' are attached to an important body of law, for instance '''[[water law]]''', for the provision of [[public services]]. Especially since [[privatization|privatisation]] became popular, private companies doing the jobs previously controlled by government have been bound by social responsibilities. [[Energy policy|Energy]], [[Ofgem|gas]] [[telecommunication policy|telecomms]] and [[water law|water]] are regulated industries in most [[Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development|OECD]] countries. |
|||
* '''[[Antitrust|Competition law]]''', known in the U.S. as anti-[[trust (19th century)|trust]] law, is an evolving field that traces as far back as [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] decrees against [[price fixing]] and the English [[restraint of trade]] doctrine. Modern competition law derives from the U.S. anti-cartel and anti-monopoly statutes (the [[Sherman Act]] and [[Clayton Act]]) of the turn of the 20th century. It is used to control businesses who attempt to use their economic influence to distort market prices at the expense of [[consumer welfare]]. |
|||
* '''[[Consumer protection|Consumer law]]''' could include anything from regulations on unfair contract terms and conditions to directives on airline baggage insurance. |
|||
* '''[[Environmental law]]''' is increasingly important, especially in light of the [[Kyoto Protocol]] and the imminent danger of [[climate change]]. Environmental protection also serves to penalise [[pollution|polluters]] within domestic legal systems. |
|||
==Legal systems== |
|||
{{Main|Legal systems of the world}} |
|||
In general, legal systems around the world can be split between civil law jurisdictions, on the one hand, and systems using common law and equity, on the other. The term civil law, referring to a legal system, should not be confused with [[civil law (common law)|civil law]] as a group of legal subjects, as distinguished from criminal law or [[public law]]. A third type of legal system — still accepted by some countries in part, or even in whole — is religious law, based on [[scripture]]s and interpretations thereof. The specific system that a country follows is often determined by its history, its connection with countries abroad, and its adherence to international standards. The [[sources of law|sources]] that jurisdictions recognise as authoritatively binding are the defining features of legal systems. Yet classification of different systems is a matter of [[form]] rather than substance, since similar rules often prevail. |
|||
===Civil law=== |
|||
{{main|Civil law (legal system)}} |
|||
[[Image:Code Civil 1804.png|thumb|left|First page of the 1804 edition of the [[Napoleonic Code]]]] |
|||
Civil law is the legal system used in most countries around the world today. In civil law the sources recognised as authoritative are, primarily, legislation – especially [[codification]]s in [[constitution]]s or [[statute]]s passed by government – and, secondarily, custom.<ref>Civil law jurisdictions recognise custom as "the other source of law"; hence, scholars tend to divide the civil law into the broad categories of "written law" (''ius scriptum'') or legislation, and "unwritten law" (''ius non scriptum'') or custom. Yet they tend to dismiss custom as being of slight importance compared to legislation (Georgiadis, ''General Principles of Civil Law'', 19; Washofsky, ''Taking Precedent Seriously'', 7).</ref> Codifications date back millennia, with one early example being the ancient [[Babylonian law|Babylonian]] [[Code of Hammurabi|Codex Hammurabi]], but modern civil law systems essentially derive from the legal practice of the [[Roman Empire]], whose texts were rediscovered in [[Middle Ages|medieval]] Europe. Roman law in the days of the [[Roman Republic]] and Empire was heavily procedural, and there was no professional legal class.<ref>Gordley-von Mehren, ''Comparative Study of Private Law'', 18</ref> Instead a lay person, ''iudex'', was chosen to adjudicate. Precedents were not reported, so any case law that developed was disguised and almost unrecognised.<ref>Gordley-von Mehren, ''Comparative Study of Private Law'', 21</ref> Each case was to be decided afresh from the laws of the state, which mirrors the (theoretical) unimportance of judges' decisions for future cases in civil law systems today. During the 6th century AD in the [[Byzantine Empire|Eastern Roman Empire]], the Emperor [[Justinian I|Justinian]] codified and consolidated the laws that had existed in Rome, so that what remained was one-twentieth of the mass of legal texts from before.<ref>Stein, ''Roman Law in European History'', 32</ref> This became known as the ''[[Corpus Juris Civilis]]''. As one legal historian wrote, "Justinian consciously looked back to the golden age of Roman law and aimed to restore it to the peak it had reached three centuries before."<ref>Stein, ''Roman Law in European History'', 35</ref> Western Europe, meanwhile, slowly slipped into the [[Dark Ages]], and it was not until the 11th century that scholars in the [[University of Bologna]] rediscovered the texts and used them to interpret their own laws.<ref>Stein, ''Roman Law in European History'', 43</ref> Civil law codifications based closely on Roman law continued to spread throughout Europe until the [[Enlightenment]]; then, in the 19th century, both France, with the [[Code Civil]], and Germany, with the [[Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch]], modernised their legal codes. Both these codes influenced heavily not only the law systems of the countries in continental Europe (e.g. [[Law of Greece|Greece]]), but also the [[Law of Japan|Japanese]] and [[South Korea|Korean]] legal traditions.<ref>Hatzis, ''The Short-Lived Influence of the Napoleonic Civil Code in Greece'', 253–263<br>* Demirgüç-Kunt -Levine, ''Financial Structures and Economic Growth'', 204</ref> Today countries that have civil law systems range from [[Law of Russia|Russia]] and [[Law of the People's Republic of China|China]] to most of [[Central America|Central]] and [[Law of South America|Latin America]].<ref>[https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2100.html The World Factbook — Field Listing – Legal system], CIA</ref> |
|||
===Common law and equity=== |
|||
{{main|Common law}} |
|||
[[Image:King John of England signs the Magna Carta - Illustration from Cassell's History of England - Century Edition - published circa 1902.jpg|thumb|right|King John of England signs Magna Carta]] |
|||
Common law and equity are systems of law whose special distinction is the doctrine of precedent, or ''[[stare decisis]]'' (Latin for "to stand by decisions"). Alongside this "judge-made law", common law systems always have governments who pass new laws and statutes. But these are not put into a codified form. Common law comes from England and was inherited by almost every country that once belonged to the [[British Empire]], with the exceptions of [[Malta]], [[Law of Scotland|Scotland]], the U.S. state of [[Law of Louisiana|Louisiana]] and the Canadian province of [[Quebec law|Quebec]]. Common law had its beginnings in the Middle Ages, when the English monarchy had been weakened by the enormous cost of fighting for control over large parts of France. [[John of England|King John]] had been forced by his barons to sign a document limiting his authority to pass laws. This "great charter" or ''[[Magna Carta]]'' of 1215 also required that the King's entourage of judges hold their courts and judgements at "a certain place" rather than dispensing autocratic justice in unpredictable places about the country.<ref>[http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/magnacarta.html Magna Carta], Fordham University</ref> A concentrated and elite group of judges acquired a dominant role in law-making under this system, and compared to its European counterparts the English judiciary became highly centralised. In 1297, for instance, while the highest court in France had fifty-one judges, the English Court of Common Pleas had five.<ref>Gordley-von Mehren, ''Comparative Study of Private Law'', 4</ref> This powerful and tight-knit judiciary gave rise to a rigid and inflexible system of common law.<ref>Gordley-von Mehren, ''Comparative Study of Private Law'', 3</ref> As a result, as time went on, increasing numbers of citizens petitioned the King to override the common law, and on the King's behalf the [[Lord Chancellor]] gave judgement to do what was equitable in a case. From the time of [[Thomas More|Sir Thomas More]], the first lawyer to be appointed as Lord Chancellor, a systematic body of equity grew up alongside the rigid common law, and developed its own [[Court of Chancery]]. At first, equity was often criticised as erratic, that it "varies like the Chancellor's foot". But over time it developed solid [[Maxims of equity|principles]], especially under [[John Scott, 1st Earl of Eldon|Lord Eldon]].<ref>''Gee v. Pritchard'' (1818) 2 Swans. 402, 414</ref> In the 19th century the two systems were fused into one another. In developing the common law and equity, academic authors have always played an important part. [[William Blackstone]], from around 1760, was the first scholar to describe and teach it.<ref>Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/blackstone/bk1ch1.htm Book the First – Chapter the First]</ref> But merely in describing, scholars who sought explanations and underlying structures slowly changed the way the law actually worked.<ref>Gordley-von Mehren, ''Comparative Study of Private Law'', 17</ref> |
|||
===Religious law=== |
|||
{{main|Religious law}} |
|||
[[Image:TorahScroll.jpg|thumb|left|[[Ashkenazi]] [[Torah scroll]]]] |
|||
Religious law refers to the notion that the [[word of God]] is law. Examples include the [[Judaism|Jewish]] [[Halakha]] and [[Islam]]ic [[Sharia]], both of which mean the "path to follow". [[Christianity|Christian]] [[Canon law]] also survives in some Church communities. The implication of religion for law is unalterability, because the word of God cannot be amended or legislated against by judges or governments. However, religious texts usually do not provide for a thorough and detailed legal system. For instance, the [[Quran]] has some law but not much, and it acts merely as a source of further law through interpretation.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 159</ref> This is mainly contained in a body of jurisprudence known as the [[fiqh]]. The first five books of the [[Old Testament]] are known as the [[Torah]] and include [[Genesis]], [[Exodus]], [[Leviticus]], [[Book of Numbers|Numbers]] and [[Deuteronomy]]. The Halakha is the interpretation of teachings and is followed by [[Orthodox Judaism|orthodox]] and [[Conservative Judaism|conservative]] Jews in both [[ecclesiology|ecclesiastical]] and civil relations. Nevertheless, [[Israel]] is not governed by Halakha, but under [[Law of Israel|Israeli law]], the [[litigant]]s may decide, because of personal belief, to have a dispute heard by a Rabbinic court and be bound by its rulings. Canon law is only in use by members of the clergy in the [[Roman Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] and the [[Anglican Communion]]. Until the [[18th century]] Sharia law reigned supreme, nominally at least, throughout the [[Muslim world]]; but since the mid-1940s efforts have been made, in country after country, to bring the law more into line with modern conditions and conceptions.<ref name="AA">Anderson, ''Law Reform in the Middle East'', 43<br>* Giannoulatos, ''Islam'', 274-275</ref> Nowadays, Sharia is merely an optional supplement to the civil or common law of most countries, though [[Saudi Arabia]] and [[Iran]]'s whole legal systems source their law in Sharia. During the last few decades, one of the fundamental features of the movement of [[Islamic resurgence]] has been the call to restore the Sharia, which has generated a vast amount of literature and affected [[world politics]].<ref name="H1">Hallaq, ''The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law'', 1</ref> |
|||
===Jurisdictions=== |
|||
Despite the usefulness of different classifications, every legal system has its own individual identity. Below are groups of legal systems, categorised by their [[geography]]. Click the "show" buttons on the right for the lists of countries. |
|||
{{Africa_in_topic|Law of}} |
|||
{{North America in topic|Law of}} |
|||
{{South America in topic|Law of}} |
|||
{{Asia in topic|Law of}} |
|||
{{Europe in topic|Law of}} |
|||
{{Oceania in topic|Law of}} |
|||
==Legal theory== |
|||
===History of law=== |
|||
{{Main|Legal history}} |
|||
[[Image:Milkau Oberer Teil der Stele mit dem Text von Hammurapis Gesetzescode 369-2.jpg|thumb|left|King [[Hammurabi]] is revealed the [[Code of Hammurabi|code of laws]] by the Mesopotamian sun god [[Shamash]].]] |
|||
The [[history]] of law is closely connected to the development of [[civilization|civilizations]]. [[Ancient Egypt]]ian law, dating as far back as 3000 BC, had a civil code that was probably broken into twelve books. It was based on the concept of [[Ma'at]], characterised by tradition, [[rhetoric]]al speech, social equality and impartiality.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last=Théodoridés|title = law | encyclopedia = Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt}}<br>* VerSteeg, ''Law in ancient Egypt''</ref> Around 1760 BC under [[Hammurabi|King Hammurabi]], ancient [[Babylonian law]] was codified and put in stone for the public to see in the marketplace; this became known as the [[Code of Hammurabi|Codex Hammurabi]]. But like Egyptian law, which is pieced together by historians from records of litigation, few sources remain and much has been lost over time. The influence of these earlier laws on later civilisations was small.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 86</ref> The Torah from the Old Testament is probably the oldest body of law still relevant for modern legal systems, dating back to 1280 BC. It takes the form of moral imperatives, like the [[Ten Commandments]] and the [[Noahide Laws]], as recommendations for a good society. [[History of Athens|Ancient Athens]], the small [[Ancient Greece|Greek]] city-state, was the first society based on broad inclusion of the citizenry, excluding women and the slave class. Athens had no legal science, and Ancient Greek has no word for "law" as an abstract concept.<ref>Kelly, ''A Short History of Western Legal Theory'', 5–6</ref> Yet [[Ancient Greek law]] contained major [[Constitution of the Athenians|constitutional]] innovations in the development of [[Athenian democracy|democracy]].<ref>Ober, ''The Nature of Athenian Democracy'', 121</ref> |
|||
[[Roman law]] was heavily influenced by Greek teachings.<ref>Kelly, ''A Short History of Western Legal Theory, 39 </ref> It forms the bridge to the modern legal world, over the centuries between the rise and decline of the Roman Empire.<ref name="BrRL">As a legal system, Roman law has affected the development of law in most of [[Western civilization|Western civilisation]] as well as in parts of the [[Eastern world]]. It also forms the basis for the law codes of most countries of continental Europe ({{cite encyclopedia|title=Roman law|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica}}).</ref> Roman law underwent major codification in the ''[[Corpus Juris Civilis]]'' of Emperor Justinian. It was lost through the Dark Ages, but rediscovered around the 11th century. Mediæval legal scholars began researching the Roman codes and using their concepts. In mediæval England, the King's powerful judges began to develop a body of precedent, which became the common law. But also, a Europe-wide ''[[Law Merchant|Lex Mercatoria]]'' was formed, so that merchants could trade using familiar standards, rather than the many splintered types of local law. The ''Lex Mercatoria'', a precursor to modern commercial law, emphasised the freedom of contract and alienability of property.<ref>Sealey-Hooley, ''Commercial Law'', 14</ref> As [[nationalism]] grew in the 18th and 19th centuries, ''Lex Mercatoria'' was incorporated into countries' local law under new civil codes. The French [[Napoleonic Code]] and the [[Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch|German]] became the most influential. As opposed to English common law, which consists of enormous tomes of case law, codes in small books are easy to export and for judges to apply. However, today there are signs that civil and common law are converging. [[European Union law]] is codified in treaties, but develops through the precedent laid down by the [[European Court of Justice]]. |
|||
[[Image:Constitution of India.jpg|thumb|right|The [[Constitution of India]] is the longest written constitution for a country, containing 444 articles, 12 schedules, numerous amendments and 117,369 words.]] |
|||
[[History of India|Ancient India]] and [[History of China|China]] represent distinct traditions of law, and had historically independent schools of legal theory and practice. The ''[[Arthashastra]]'', dating from 400 BC, and the ''[[Manusmriti]]'', from 100 AD, were influential treatises in India, texts that were considered authoritative legal guidance.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 255</ref> Manu's central philosophy was tolerance and [[pluralism]], and was cited across [[Southeast Asia]].<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 276</ref> But this [[Hinduism|Hindu]] tradition, along with Islamic law, was supplanted by the common law when India became part of the [[British Empire]].<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 273</ref> [[Malaysia]], [[Brunei]], [[Law of Singapore|Singapore]] and [[Law of Hong Kong|Hong Kong]] also adopted the common law. The eastern Asia legal tradition reflects a unique blend of secular and religious influences.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 287</ref> Japan was the first country to begin modernising its legal system along western lines, by importing bits of the [[Code Civil|French]], but mostly the German Civil Code.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 304</ref> This partly reflected Germany's status as a rising power in the late 19th century. Similarly, [[traditional Chinese law]] gave way to westernisation towards the final years of the [[Qing Dynasty|Ch'ing dynasty]] in the form of six private law codes based mainly on the Japanese model of German law.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 305</ref> Today [[Taiwan]]ese law retains the closest affinity to the codifications from that period, because of the split between [[Chiang Kai-shek]]'s nationalists, who fled there, and [[Mao Zedong]]'s communists who won control of the mainland in 1949. The current legal infrastructure in the [[People's Republic of China]] was heavily influenced by [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] [[Socialist law]], which essentially inflates administrative law at the expense of private law rights.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 307</ref> Today, however, because of rapid industrialisation China has been reforming, at least in terms of economic (if not social and political) rights. A new contract code in 1999 represented a turn away from administrative domination.<ref>Glenn, ''Legal Traditions of the World'', 309</ref> Furthermore, after negotiations lasting fifteen years, in 2001 China joined the [[World Trade Organisation]].<ref>Farah, ''Five Years of China WTO Membership'', 263–304</ref> |
|||
===Philosophy of law=== |
|||
{{main|Jurisprudence}} |
|||
{{seealso|Political philosophy}} |
|||
{| class="toccolours" style="float: left; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" |
|||
| style="text-align: left;" | "But what, after all, is a law? […] When I say that the object of laws is always general, I mean that law considers subjects en masse and actions in the abstract, and never a particular person or action. […] On this view, we at once see that it can no longer be asked whose business it is to make laws, since they are acts of the general will; nor whether the prince is above the law, since he is a member of the State; nor whether the law can be unjust, since no one is unjust to himself; nor how we can be both free and subject to the laws, since they are but registers of our wills." |
|||
|- |
|||
| style="text-align: left;" | '''Jean-Jacques Rousseau''', ''[[The Social Contract]]'', II, 6.<ref>Rousseau, ''The Social Contract'', [http://www.constitution.org/jjr/socon_02.htm#006 Book II: Chapter 6 (Law)]</ref> |
|||
|} |
|||
The [[philosophy]] of law is known as jurisprudence. Normative jurisprudence is essentially [[political philosophy]] and asks "what should law be?". Analytic jurisprudence, on the other hand, is a distinctive field which asks "what is law?". An early famous philosopher of law was [[John Austin (legal philosopher)|John Austin]], a student of [[Jeremy Bentham]] and first chair of law at the new [[University of London]] from 1829. Austin's [[utilitarianism|utilitarian]] answer was that law is "commands, backed by threat of sanctions, from a sovereign, to whom people have a habit of obedience".<ref name="jap">Bix, [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/austin-john/#3 John Austin]</ref> This approach was long accepted, especially as an alternative to [[natural law]] theory. Natural lawyers, such as [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], argue that human law reflects essentially [[morality|moral]] and unchangeable laws of nature. [[Immanuel Kant]], for instance, believed a moral imperative requires laws "be chosen as though they should hold as universal laws of nature".<ref>[[Immanuel Kant|Kant, Immanuel]], ''Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals'', 42 (par. 434)</ref> Austin and Bentham, following [[David Hume]], thought this conflated what [[Is-ought problem|"is" and what "ought to be"]] the case. They believed in law's [[legal positivism|positivism]], that real law is entirely separate from "morality".<ref>Green, [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/ Legal Positivism]</ref> Kant was also criticised by [[Friedrich Nietzsche]], who believed that law emanates from [[The Will to Power]] and cannot be labelled as "moral" or "immoral".<ref>Kazantzakis, ''Friedrich Nietzsche and the Philosophy of Law'', 97-98<br>* Linarelli, ''Nietzsche in Law's Cathedral'', 23-26</ref> Thus, Nietzsche criticised the principle of [[equality]], and believed that law should be committed to freedom to engage in will to power.<ref name="N11">Nietzsche, ''Zur Genealogie der Moral'', Second Essay, 11</ref> |
|||
In 1934, the Austrian philosopher [[Hans Kelsen]] continued the positivist tradition in his book the ''[[Pure Theory of Law]]''.<ref>Marmor, [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lawphil-theory/ The Pure Theory of Law]</ref> Kelsen believed that though law is separate from morality, it is endowed with "normativity", meaning we ought to obey it. Whilst laws are positive "is" statements (e.g. the fine for reversing on a highway ''is'' [[Euro|€]]500), law tells us what we "should" do (i.e. not drive backwards). So every legal system can be hypothesised to have a basic norm (''[[Grundnorm]]'') telling us we should obey the law. [[Carl Schmitt]], Kelsen's major intellectual opponent, rejected positivism, and the idea of the [[rule of law]], because he did not accept the primacy of abstract normative principles over concrete political positions and decisions.<ref name=">Bielefeldt, ''Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism'', 25-26</ref> Therefore, Schmitt advocated a jurisprudence of the exception ([[state of emergency]]), which denied that legal norms could encompass of all political experience.<ref name="F171">Finn, ''Constitutions in Crisis'', 170-171</ref> |
|||
[[Image:Bentham.jpg|thumb|150px|right|Bentham's utilitarian theories remained dominant in law until the 20th century.]] |
|||
Later in the 20th century, [[H. L. A. Hart]] attacked Austin for his simplifications and Kelsen for his fictions in ''[[The Concept of Law]]''.<ref>Bayles, ''Hart's Legal Philosophy'', 21</ref> As the chair of jurisprudence at [[Oxford University]], Hart argued law is a "system of rules". Rules, said Hart, are divided into primary rules (rules of conduct) and secondary rules (rules addressed to officials to administer primary rules). Secondary rules are divided into rules of adjudication (to resolve legal disputes), rules of change (allowing laws to be varied) and the rule of recognition (allowing laws to be identified as valid). Two of Hart's students have continued the debate since. [[Ronald Dworkin]] was his successor in the Chair of Jurisprudence at Oxford and his greatest critic. In his book ''Law's Empire'', Dworkin attacked Hart and the positivists for their refusal to treat law as a moral issue. Dworkin argues that law is an "[[interpretivism (legal)|interpretive]] concept",<ref>Dworkin, ''Law's Empire'', 410</ref> that requires judges to find the best fitting and most just solution to a legal dispute, given their constitutional traditions. [[Joseph Raz]], on the other hand, has defended the positivist outlook and even criticised Hart's 'soft social thesis' approach in ''The Authority of Law''.<ref name="jra">Raz, ''The Authority of Law'', 3–36</ref> Raz argues that law is authority, identifiable purely through social sources, without reference to moral reasoning. Any categorisation of rules beyond their role as authoritative dispute mediation is best left to [[sociology]], rather than jurisprudence.<ref>Raz, ''The Authority of Law'', 37 etc.</ref> |
|||
===Economic analysis of law=== |
|||
{{Main|Law and economics}} |
|||
[[Image:Becker.jpg|150px|thumb|left|[[Gary Becker|Becker]], one of the [[Chicago school (economics)|Chicago School]], runs a blog with economist and lawyer [[Richard Posner]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/ |title=The Becker-Posner Blog |accessdate=2007-02-03}}</ref>]] |
|||
Economic analysis of law is an approach to legal theory that incorporates and applies the methods and ideas of [[economics]] to law. The discipline arose partly out of a critique of trade unions and U.S. [[antitrust]] law. The most influential proponents, such as [[Richard Posner]] and [[Oliver Williamson]] and the so-called [[Chicago school (economics)|Chicago School]] of economists and lawyers including [[Milton Friedman]] and [[Gary Becker]], are generally advocates of [[deregulation]] and [[privatisation]], and are hostile to state regulation or what they see as restrictions on the operation of [[free market]]s.<ref>S.M. Jakoby, ''Economic Ideas and the Labour Market'', 53</ref> |
|||
The most decorated economic analyst of law is 1991 [[Nobel Prize in Economics|Nobel Prize]] winner [[Ronald Coase]]. His first major article, ''[[The Nature of the Firm]]'' (1937), argued that the reason for the existence of firms ([[company law|companies]], partnerships, etc.) is the existence of [[transaction cost]]s.<ref>Coase, ''The Nature of the Firm'', 386–405</ref> [[Homo economicus|Rational individuals]] trade through bilateral contracts on open markets until the costs of transactions mean that using corporations to produce things is more cost-effective. His second major article, ''The Problem of Social Cost'' (1960), argued that if we lived in a world without transaction costs, people would bargain with one another to create the same allocation of resources, regardless of the way a court might rule in property disputes.<ref>Coase, ''The Problem of Social Coast'', 1–44</ref> Coase used the example of a [[nuisance]] case named ''Sturges v. Bridgman'', where a noisy sweetmaker and a quiet doctor were neighbours and went to court to see who should have to move.<ref>''Sturges v. Bridgman'' (1879) 11 Ch D 852</ref> Coase said that regardless of whether the judge ruled that the sweetmaker had to stop using his machinery, or that the doctor had to put up with it, they could strike a mutually beneficial bargain about who moves house that reaches the same outcome of resource distribution. Only, the existence of transaction costs may prevent this.<ref>Coase, ''The Problem of Social Cost'', IV, 7</ref> So the law ought to pre-empt what ''would'' happen, and be guided by the most [[efficiency (economics)|efficient]] solution. The idea is that law and regulation are not as important or effective at helping people as lawyers and government planners believe.<ref>Coase, ''The Problem of Social Cost'', V, 9</ref> Coase and others like him wanted a change of approach, to put the burden of proof for positive effects on a government that was intervening in the market, by analysing the costs of action.<ref>Coase, ''The Problem of Social Cost'', VIII, 23</ref> |
|||
===Sociology of law=== |
|||
{{Main|Sociology of law}} |
|||
[[Image:Max Weber 1917.jpg|thumb|right|[[Max Weber]] in 1917 - Weber who began as a lawyer is regarded as one of the founders of sociology and sociology of law]] |
|||
Sociology of law is a diverse field of study that examines the interaction of law with society. Sociology of law overlaps with jurisprudence, economic analysis of law and more specialised subjects such as [[criminology]].<ref>Jary, ''Collins Dictionary of Sociology'', 636</ref> The [[institution]]s of law and the [[social construction]] of legal issues and systems are relevant areas of inquiry. Initially, legal theorists were suspicious of the discipline. Kelsen attacked one of its founders, [[Eugen Ehrlich]], who wanted to emphasise the difference between positive law, which lawyers learn and apply, and other forms of 'law' or social norms that regulate everyday life, generally preventing conflicts from reaching lawyers and courts.<ref>Rottleuthner, ''La Sociologie du Droit en Allemagne'', 109<br>* Rottleuthner, ''Rechtstheoritische Probleme der Sociologie des Rechts'', 521</ref> Around 1900 [[Max Weber]] defined his "scientific" approach to law, identifying the "legal rational form" as a type of domination, not attributable to people but to abstract norms.<ref>Rheinstein, ''Max Weber on Law and Economy in Society'', 336</ref> [[Rational-legal authority|Legal rationalism]] was his term for a body of coherent and calculable law which formed a precondition for modern political developments and the modern bureaucratic state and developed in parallel with the growth of [[capitalism]].<ref>Jary, ''Collins Dictionary of Sociology'', 636</ref> Another sociologist, [[Émile Durkheim]], wrote in ''The Division of Labour in Society'' that as society becomes more complex, the body of civil law concerned primarily with restitution and compensation grows at the expense of criminal laws and penal sanctions.<ref>Johnson, ''The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology, 156</ref> Other notable early legal sociologists included [[Hugo Sinzheimer]], [[Theodor Geiger]], [[Georges Gurvitch]] and [[Leon Petrażycki]] in Europe, and [[William Graham Sumner]] in the U.S.<ref>Gurvitch, ''Sociology of Law'', 142<br>* Papachristou, ''Sociology of Law'', 81–82</ref> |
|||
==Legal institutions== |
|||
{| class="toccolours" style="float: left; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; width:25em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" |
|||
| style="text-align: left;" | "It is a real unity of them all in one and the same person, made by covenant of every man with every man, in such manner as if every man should say to every man: I authorise and give up my right of governing myself to this man, or to this assembly of men, on this condition; that thou give up, thy right to him, and authorise all his actions in like manner. |
|||
|- |
|||
| style="text-align: left;" | '''Thomas Hobbes''', ''Leviathan'', [http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-c.html#CHAPTERXVII XVII] |
|||
|} |
|||
The main institutions of law in industrialised countries are independent courts, representative parliaments, an accountable executive, the [[military]] and [[police]], [[bureaucracy|bureaucratic]] organisation, the profession of [[lawyer]]s and [[civil society]] itself. [[John Locke]] in ''Two Treatises On Civil Government'', and [[Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu|Baron de Montesquieu]] after him in ''[[The Spirit of the Laws]]'', advocated a [[separation of powers]] between the institutions that wield political influence, namely the [[judiciary]], [[legislature]] and [[executive (government)|executive]].<ref>Montesquieu, ''The Spirit of Laws'', [http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol_11.htm#006 Book XI: Of the Laws Which Establish Political Liberty, with Regard to the Constitution, Chapters 6–7]</ref> Their principle was that no person should be able to usurp all powers of the state, in contrast to the [[autocracy|absolutist]] theory of [[Thomas Hobbes]]' ''[[Leviathan (book)|Leviathan]]''.<ref name="H17">Thomas Hobbes, ''Leviathan'', [http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-c.html#CHAPTERXVII XVII]</ref> More recently, [[Max Weber]] and many others reshaped thinking about the extensions of the state that come under the control of the executive. Modern military, policing and bureaucratic power over ordinary citizens' daily lives pose special problems for accountability that earlier writers like Locke and Montesquieu could not have foreseen. The custom and practice of the legal profession itself is an important part of people's access to justice, whilst civil society is a term used to refer to the social institutions, communities and partnerships that are the political base of the law. |
|||
===Judiciary=== |
|||
{{Main|Judiciary}} |
|||
[[Image:Public hearing at the ICJ.jpg|thumb|The [[judge]]s of the [[International Court of Justice]] in [[the Hague]]]] |
|||
A judiciary is a group of judges who mediate people's disputes and determine the outcome. Most countries have a system of appeals courts, up to a supreme authority. In the U.S., this is the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]]<ref>[http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/briefoverview.pdf A Brief Overview of the Supreme Court], Supreme Court of the United States</ref>; in Australia, the [[High Court of Australia|High Court]]; in the U.K., the [[House of Lords]];<ref>[http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/briefoverview.pdf House of Lords Judgements], House of Lords</ref> in Germany, the ''[[Bundesverfassungsgericht]]''; in France, the ''[[Cour de cassation (France)|Cour de Cassation]]''.<ref>[http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen.html Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts], Bundesverfassungsgericht<br>* [http://www.courdecassation.fr/jurisprudence_publications_documentation_2/ Jurisprudence, publications, documentation], Cour de cassation</ref> |
|||
However, for most European countries the [[European Court of Justice]]<ref>{{cite web|title=European Court of Justice|url=http://curia.europa.eu/en/transitpage.htm|accessdate=2006-11-10}}</ref> in [[Luxembourg]] may overrule national law, where EU law is relevant. The [[European Court of Human Rights]] in [[Strasbourg]] allows citizens of the [[Council of Europe]] member states to bring cases to it concerning [[human rights]] issues. |
|||
Almost every country allows its highest judicial authority to strike down legislation determined to be [[constitutionality|unconstitutional]]. For instance, the United States Supreme Court struck down a [[Texas|Texan]] law forbidding assistance to women in [[abortion]], in ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''.<ref>''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' (1973) [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=410&page=113 410 U.S. 113] Retrieved [[2007-01-26]]</ref> The constitution's [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|fourteenth amendment]] was interpreted to give Americans a right to [[privacy]], hence a woman's [[pro-choice|right to choose]] abortion. The judiciary is theoretically bound by the constitution, much as legislative bodies are. In most countries judges may only [[interpretivism (legal)|interpret]] the constitution and all other laws. But in common law countries, where matters are not constitutional, the judiciary may also create law under the doctrine of [[precedent]]. On the other hand, the United Kingdom, [[Finland]] and [[New Zealand]] still assert the ideal of [[parliamentary sovereignty]], whereby the unelected judiciary may not overturn law passed by a democratic legislature. |
|||
===Legislature=== |
|||
{{Main|Legislature}} |
|||
[[Image:European-parliament-brussels-inside.JPG|thumb|left|The [[debate|debating]] chamber of the [[European Parliament]]]] |
|||
Prominent examples of legislatures are the [[Houses of Parliament]] in London, the [[United States Congress|Congress]] in Washington D.C., the ''[[Bundestag]]'' in Berlin, the ''[[Duma]]'' in Moscow and the [[National Assembly of France|''Assemblée nationale'']] in Paris. By the principle of representative government, people vote for political decision-makers in order to make them carry out their wishes. Although some countries — for instance, [[Israel]], [[Greece]], [[Sweden]] and [[China]] — are [[unicameralism|unicameral]], most legislatures are [[bicameralism|bicameral]]. In the 'lower house' politicians are elected to represent smaller [[constituency|constituencies]]. The 'upper house' is usually elected to represent a larger state in a [[federal]] system (as in Australia or Germany), a different voting configuration in a unitary system (as in France)<!-- it is difficult to connect the sentence fragment after the comma to what precedes it-->. In the UK the upper house is appointed by the government as a [[House of Lords|house of review]]. One criticism of bicameral systems with two elected chambers is that the upper and lower houses may simply mirror one another. On the other hand, the traditional justification of bicameralism is that it minimises arbitrariness and injustice in governmental action.<ref>Riker, ''The Justification of Bicameralism'', 101</ref> |
|||
To pass legislation, a majority of Members of Parliament must [[vote]] for a [[bill (proposed law)|bill]] in each house. Normally there will be several readings and amendments proposed by the different [[political party|political factions]]. If a country has an entrenched constitution, a special majority for changes to the constitution will be required, making changes to the law more difficult. A [[government]] usually leads the process, which can be formed from Members of Parliament (e.g. the UK or Germany). But in a presidential system, an executive appoints a [[cabinet]] to govern from his or her political allies whether or not they are elected (e.g. the U.S. or [[Brazil]]), and the legislature's role is reduced to either [[ratification]] or [[veto]]. |
|||
===Executive=== |
|||
{{Main|Executive (government)|Head of State}} |
|||
[[Image:Lula - foto oficial05012007.jpg|thumb|right| [[Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva]] is the elected by [[popular vote]] [[President of Brazil]]. [[Brazil]], like most states in the [[Americas]], is a [[democracy]] with a [[presidential system]] of government.]] |
|||
The "executive" in a legal system refers to the government's centre of political authority. In most democratic countries, like the UK, Germany, India and Japan, it is elected into and drawn from the legislature and is often called the [[cabinet]]. Alongside this is usually the [[head of state]], who lacks formal political power but symbolically enacts laws. The head of state is sometimes appointed (the [[President of Germany|Bundespräsident]] in Germany), sometimes hereditary ([[British monarchy|British monarch]]) and sometimes elected by popular vote (the [[President of Austria]]). The other important model is found in countries like France, the U.S. and Russia, under whose [[presidential system]]s the executive branch exists and presides separately from the legislature, to which it is not accountable, and the legislature cannot in normal circumstances dismiss it.<ref>Haggard, ''Presidents, Parliaments and Policy'', 71<br>* Olson, ''The New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe'', 7</ref> |
|||
The executive's role may vary from country to country. Usually it will initiate or propose the majority of legislation and handle a country's [[foreign relations]]. The military and police often fall under executive control, as well as the bureaucracy. Ministers, or [[Secretary of State|secretaries of state]] of the government, head a country's public offices; for instance the [[health department]] or the [[department of justice]]. The election of a different executive is therefore capable of [[revolutionising]] an entire country's approach to government. |
|||
===Military and police=== |
|||
{{Main|Military|Police}} |
|||
[[Image:US Customs and Border Protection officers.jpg|thumb|left|[[U.S. Customs and Border Protection]] officers]] |
|||
The military and police are sometimes referred to as "the long and strong arm of the law".<ref>Dickens, ''The Old Curiosity Shop'', Chapter 73</ref> While military organisation have existed as long as governments themselves, a standing police force is relatively modern. Mediæval England used a system of travelling criminal courts, or [[Assize Court|assizes]], which used [[show trial]]s and public executions to instill communities with fear and keep them under control. The first modern police were probably those in 17th-century Paris, in the court of [[Louis XIV of France|Louis XIV]],<ref>[http://www.history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=219522 History of Police Forces], History.com Encyclopedia</ref> although the Paris Prefecture of Police claim they were the world's first uniformed policemen.<ref>[http://www.prefecture-police-paris.interieur.gouv.fr/documentation/bicentenaire/theme_expo4.htm Des Sergents de Ville et Gardiens de la Paix à la Police de Proximité], La Préfecture de Police</ref> In 1829, after the [[French Revolution]] and [[Napoleon I of France|Napoleon]]'s dictatorship, a government decree created the first uniformed policemen in Paris and all other French cities, known as ''sergents de ville'' ("city sergeants"). In Britain, the [[Metropolitan Police Act]] 1829 was passed by Parliament under [[Home Secretary]] Sir [[Robert Peel]], founding the London [[Metropolitan Police Service|Metropolitan Police]]. |
|||
Sociologist Max Weber famously argued that the state is that which controls the legitimate monopoly of the means of violence.<ref name="mwp154">Weber, [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Politics_as_a_Vocation Politics as a Vocation]<br>* Weber, ''The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation'', 154</ref> The military and police carry out enforcement at the request of the government or the courts. The term [[failed state]] is used where the police and military no longer control security and order and society moves into [[anarchy]], the absence of government. |
|||
===Bureaucracy=== |
|||
{{Main|Bureaucracy}} |
|||
[[Image:United Nations HQ - New York City.jpg|thumb|right|The [[United Nations]]' New York headquarters houses civil servants that cater for its 192 member states.]] |
|||
The word "bureaucracy" derives from the [[French language|French]] for "office" (''bureau'') and [[Ancient Greek]] for "power" (''kratos''). Like the military and police, all of a legal system's government servants and bodies that make up the bureaucracy carry out the wishes of the executive. One of the earliest references to the concept was made by [[Friedrich Melchior, baron von Grimm|Baron de Grimm]], a German author who lived in France. In 1765 he wrote, |
|||
<blockquote>"The real spirit of the laws in France is that bureaucracy of which the late Monsieur de Gournay used to complain so greatly; here the offices, clerks, secretaries, inspectors and ''intendants'' are not appointed to benefit the public interest, indeed the public interest appears to have been established so that offices might exist."<ref>Albrow, ''Bureaucracy'', 16</ref></blockquote> |
|||
Cynicism over "officialdom" is still common, and the workings of public servants is typically contrasted to [[private enterprise]] motivated by [[Maximization|profit]].<ref>Mises, ''Bureaucracy'', II, [http://www.mises.org/etexts/mises/bureaucracy/section2.asp Bureaucratic Management]</ref> In fact private companies, especially large ones, also have bureaucracies.<ref name="K367">Kettl, ''Public Bureaucracies'', 367</ref> Negative perceptions of "[[red tape]]" aside, [[public services]] such as schooling, health care, policing or public transport are a crucial state function making public bureaucratic action the locus of government power.<ref name="K367" /> Writing in the early 20th century, Max Weber believed that a definitive feature of a developed state had come to be its bureaucratic support.<ref name="mwp393">Weber, ''Economy and Society'', I, 393</ref> Weber wrote that the typical characteristics of modern bureaucracy are that officials define its mission, the scope of work is bound by rules, management is composed of career experts, who manage top down, communicating through writing and binding public servants' discretion with rules.<ref>Kettl, ''Public Bureaucracies'', 371</ref> |
|||
===Legal profession=== |
|||
{{Main|Legal profession}} |
|||
[[Image:Advokat, Engelsk advokatdräkt, Nordisk familjebok.png|thumb|left|An English barrister]] |
|||
Lawyers give their clients [[solicitor|advice]] about their legal rights and duties, and [[barrister|represent]] them in [[court]]. As [[European Court of Human Rights]] has stated, the law should be adequately accessible to everyone and people should be able to foresee how the law affects them.<ref>''The Sunday Times v. The United Kingdom'' [1979] [http://www.worldlii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/1979/1.html ECHR 1 at 49] Case no. 6538/74</ref> In order to maintain professionalism, the [[practice of law]] is typically overseen by either a government or independent regulating body such as a [[bar association]], [[bar council]] or [[law society]]. An aspiring practitioner must be certified by the regulating body before undertaking his practice. This usually entails a two or three year programme at a university [[faculty of law]] or a [[law school]], earning the student a [[Bachelor of Laws]], a [[Bachelor of Civil Law]] or a [[Juris Doctor]] degree. This course of study is followed by an entrance examination (e.g. [[admission to the bar]]). Some countries require a further vocational qualification before a person is permitted to practice law. For those wishing to become a [[barrister]], this would lead to a Barrister-at-law degree, followed by a year's [[pupillage]] under the oversight of an experienced barrister. Beyond the requirements for legal practice higher academic degrees may be pursued. Examples include a [[Master of Laws]], a [[M.S.L.|Master of Legal Studies]] or a [[Doctor of Laws]]. |
|||
Once accredited, a lawyer will often work in a [[law firm]], in a [[chambers (law)|chambers]] as a sole practitioner, in a government post or in a private corporation as an internal counsel. In addition a lawyer may become a legal researcher who provides on-demand legal research through a commercial service or through freelance work. Many people trained in law put their skills to use outside the legal field entirely. Significant to the practice of law in the common law tradition is the [[legal research]] to determine the current state of the law. This usually entails exploring [[law report|case-law reports]], [[legal periodical]]s and legislation. Law practice also involves drafting documents such as court [[pleading]]s, persuasive [[brief (law)|briefs]], [[contract]]s, or [[will (law)|wills]] and [[trust law|trust]]s. Negotiation and [[dispute resolution]] skills are also important to legal practice, depending on the field. |
|||
===Civil society=== |
|||
{{Main|Civil society}} |
|||
[[Image:1963 march on washington.jpg|thumb|right|A march in Washington D.C. during the [[African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968)|U.S. Civil Rights Movement]] in 1963]] |
|||
The term "civil society" dates back to [[John Locke]], who saw civil society as being of people who have "a common established law and judicature to appeal to, with authority to decide controversies between them."<ref>Locke, ''Second Treatise'', [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Two_Treatises_of_Government/The_Second_Treatise_of_Government:_An_Essay_Concerning_the_True_Origin%2C_Extent%2C_and_End_of_Civil_Government#Chap._VII._Of_Political_or_Civil_Society. Chapter 7, section 87]</ref> German philosopher [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel]] also distinguished the "state" from "civil society" (''Zivilgesellschaft'') in ''[[Elements of the Philosophy of Right]]''.<ref>Hegel, ''Elements of the Philosophy of Right'', 3, II, [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/pr/prcivils.htm 182]</ref> Hegel believed that civil society and the state were polar opposites, within the scheme of his dialectic theory of history.<ref>Pelczynski, ''The State and Civil Society'', 1–13</ref> Civil society is necessarily a source of law, by being the basis from which people form opinions and lobby for what they believe law should be. As Australian barrister and author [[Geoffrey Robertson QC]] wrote of international law, |
|||
<blockquote>"one of its primary modern sources is found in the responses of ordinary men and women, and of the non-governmental organizations which many of them support, to the human rights abuses they see on the television screen in their living rooms."<ref>Robertson, ''Crimes Against Humanity'', 98–99</ref></blockquote> |
|||
[[Freedom of speech]], [[freedom of association]] and many other individual rights allow people to meet together, discuss, criticise and hold to account their governments, from which the basis of a [[deliberative democracy]] is formed. The more people are involved with, concerned by and capable of changing how political power is exercised over their lives, the more acceptable and [[legitimacy (political science)|legitimate]] the law becomes to the people. Developed [[political party|political parties]], [[cogers|debating clubs]], [[trade union]]s, impartial [[mass media|media]], [[business]] and [[charitable organization|charities]] are all part of a healthy civil society. |
|||
==See also== |
|||
{{portal}} |
|||
: ''Main lists: [[List of basic law topics]] and [[List of legal topics]]'' |
|||
* [[Glossary of legal terms]] |
|||
* [[Landmark decision]] |
|||
* [[List of areas of law]] |
|||
* [[Lists of case law]] |
|||
* [[List of jurists]] |
|||
* [[List of legal abbreviations]] |
|||
==Notes== |
|||
{{reflist|2}} |
|||
==References== |
|||
===Printed sources=== |
|||
<div class="references-small"> |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Albrow|first=Martin|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|location=London|title=Bureaucracy (Key Concepts in Political Science)|year=1970|isbn=0-333-11262-8}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Anderson |first=J.N.D.|year=1956|month=January |title=Law Reform in the Middle East |journal=International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944—) |volume=32 |issue=1 |pages=43–51 |id= |url=http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0020-5850(195601)32%3A1%3C43%3ALRITME%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P |accessdate=2007-03-04}} |
|||
*{{Cite wikisource|Constitution of the Athenians|[[Aristotle]]}}. See original text in [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0058 Perseus program]. |
|||
*{{cite book |last= Auby|first= Jean-Bernard |title= Administrative Law of the European Union, its Member States and the United States edited by F. A. M. Stroink, René Seerden| publisher=Intersentia|year=2002|isbn= 9-050-95251-8|chapter=Administrative Law in France}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Bayles |first=Michael D. | title=Hart's Legal Philosophy|year=1992 |publisher=Springer |location= |isbn= 0-792-31981-8 |chapter=A Critique of Austin}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last= Bergkamp|first=Lucas|title=Liability and Environment| publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers|year=2001|isbn= 9-041-11645-1|chapter=Introduction}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Berle |first=Adolf |authorlink=Adolf Berle |title=Modern Corporation and Private Property |year=1932 }} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Bielefeldt|first=Heiner|editors=David Dyzenhaus|title=Law as Politics: Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism| publisher=Duke University Press|year=1998|isbn= 0-822-32244-7|chapter=Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism: Systematic Reconstruction and Countercriticism}} |
|||
*{{cite book|first=William|last=Blackstone|authorlink=William Blackstone|title=Commentaries on the Laws of England|url=http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/blackstone/blacksto.htm|year=1765–69}} |
|||
*{{cite book|first=Tom D.|last=Campbell|title=A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy edited by Robert E. Goodin and Philip Pettit|year=1993|chapter=The Contribution of Legal Studies|isbn=0-631-19951-9}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Coase |first=Ronald H.|authorlink=Ronald H. Coase |year=1937|month=November |title=The Nature of the Firm |journal=Economica |volume=4 |issue=16 |pages=386–405 |id= |url=http://www.cerna.ensmp.fr/Enseignement/CoursEcoIndus/SupportsdeCours/COASE.pdf |accessdate=2007-02-10}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Coase |first=Ronald H.|authorlink=Ronald H. Coase |year=1960|month=October |title=The Problem of Social Cost (this online version excludes some parts) |journal=Journal of Law and Economics |volume=3 |issue= |pages=1–44 |id= |url=http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/CoaseJLE1960.pdf ''The Problem of Social Cost |accessdate=2007-02-10}} |
|||
*{{cite encyclopedia|title=Criminal law|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica|date=2002}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Financial Structures and Economic Growth|last=Demirgüç-Kunt|first=Asli| coauthors=Levine, Ross| year=2001|publisher=MIT Press| isbn=0-262-54179-3|chapter=Financial Structures and Economic Growth}} |
|||
*{{citebook|last=Dickens|first=Charles|authorlink=Charles Dickens|title=The Old Curiosity Shop|year=1841|pages=Chapter 73|url=http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/700}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=The Division of Labor in Society|year=1893|last=Durkheim|publisher=The Free Press reprint|first=Emile|authorlink=Emile Durkheim|isbn=0684836386}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Dworkin |first=Ronald |authorlink=Ronald Dworkin |title=Law's Empire |year=1986 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=0674518365}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Farah |first=Paolo |year=2006 |month=August |title=Five Years of China WTO Membership. EU and US Perspectives about China's Compliance with Transparency Commitments and the Transitional Review Mechanism |journal=Legal Issues of Economic Integration |volume=33 |issue=3 |pages=263–304 |id= |url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=916768 |accessdate=}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Finn |first=John E. | title=Constitutions in Crisis: Political Violence and the Rule of Law|year=1991 |publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn= 0-195-05738-4 |chapter=Constitutional Dissolution in the Weimar Republic}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=France |first=Anatole |authorlink=Anatole France |title=The Red Lily (Le lys rouge) |year=1894 |url=http://www.online-literature.com/anatole-france/red-lily/}} |
|||
*{{gr icon}} {{cite book|title=General Principles of Civil Law|first=Apostolos S.|last=Georgiadis|year=1997|publisher=Ant. N. Sakkoulas Publishers|isbn=9-602-32715-4|chapter=Sources of Law}} |
|||
*{{gr icon}} {{cite book |last=Giannoulatos |first=Anastasios |authorlink=Archbishop Anastasios of Albania| title=Islam – A General Survey|year=1975 |location=Athens|publisher=Poreuthentes |chapter=Characteristics of Modern Islam}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Legal Traditions of the World|first=H. Patrick|last=Glenn|year=2000|isbn=0198765754|publisher=Oxford University Press}} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Gordley |first=James R. |coauthors=von Mehren, Arthur Taylor |title=An Introduction to the Comparative Study of Private Law |year=2006|isbn=9-780-52168-185-8}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Gurvitch |first=Georges |authorlink=Georges Gurvitch |coauthors=Hunt, Alan |title=Sociology of Law |year=1942—New edition 2001 |publisher=Transaction Publishers |location=Athens |isbn=0-765-80704-1|chapter=Max Webber and Eugene Ehlrich}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Haggard |first=Stephan |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=Presidents, Parliaments and Policy |year=2001 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location= | isbn=0-521-77485-3| chapter=Institutions and Public Policy in Presidential Systems}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Hallaq |first=Wael Bahjat |title=The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law |year=2005 |publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-00580-9|chapter=Introduction}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Hatzis |first=Aristides N.|year=2002|month=November |title=The Nature of the Firm |journal=European Journal of Law and Economics |volume=14 |issue=3 |pages=253–263|id= |url=http://www.springerlink.com/content/k327084735034r15/ |accessdate=2007-02-13}} |
|||
*{{de icon}} {{cite book|authorlink=Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|title=Elements of the Philosophy of Right|last=Hegel|first=Georg|year=1820|url=http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/pr/preface.htm}} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Hobbes|first=Thomas|authorlink=Thomas Hobbes|title=Leviathan|year=1651|url=http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html |chapter= Chapter XVII: Of The Causes, Generation, And Definition Of a Commonwealth}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Jakoby |first=Stanford M. |year=2005 |month=Winter |title=Economic Ideas and the Labour Market |journal=Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal |volume=25 |issue=1 |pages=43–78|id= |url=http://www.law.uiuc.edu/publications/cll&pj/archive/vol_25/issue_1/JacobyArticle25-1.pdf|chapter=Cycles of Economic Thought|accessdate=2007-02-12}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Collins Dictionary of Sociology|year=1995|last=Jary| first=David|coauthors=Julia Jary|publisher=HarperCollins|isbn=0004708040}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=The Blackwell Dictionary of Sociology|year=1995|last=Johnson| first=Alan|publisher=Blackwells publishers|isbn=1557861161}} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Kant|first=Immanuel|authorlink=Immanuel Kant|title=[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]] (Translated by Mary Gregor)|year=1785—New edition 1998|publisher=Cambridge University Press|id= 0-521-62695-1}} |
|||
*{{gr icon}} {{cite book |last=Kazantzakis |first=Nikos |authorlink=Nikos Kazantzakis| title=Friedrich Nietzsche and the Philosophy of Law and Polity|year=1909—Reissue edition 1998|location=Athens|publisher=Editions Kazantzakis |chapter=Law}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=A Short History of Western Legal Theory|last=Kelly|first=J.M.| year=1992|publisher=Oxford University Press| isbn=0198762445}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions edited by R. A. W. Rhodes, Sarah A. Binder and Bert A. Rockman |last=Kettl|first=Don| year=2006|month=November|publisher=Oxford University Press| isbn=0-199-27569-6|chapter=Public Bureaucracies}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Linarelli |first=John |year=2004 | title=Nietzsche in Law’s Cathedral: Beyond Reason and Postmodernism |journal=Catholic University Law Review |volume=53 |pages=413–457|id= |url=http://law.ulv.edu/faculty/website/linarelli/pdf/nietzsche_law_cathedral.pdf|chapter=Cycles of Economic Thought|accessdate=2007-03-05}} |
|||
*[[Image:wikisource-logo.svg|15px]] [[John Locke|Locke, John]] (1689). ''[[Two Treatises of Government|Two Treatises of Government/The Second Treatise of Government: An Essay Concerning the True Origin, Extent, and End of Civil Government]]'' |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Matthews |first=Paul |year=1995 |month=Autumn| title=The Man of Property |journal=Medical Law Review, |volume=3 |pages=251–274}} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=McGhee|first=John|publisher=Sweet and Maxwell|location=London|title=Snell's Equity|year=2000|isbn=0-421-85260-7}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Mises |first=Ludwig von | authorlink=Ludwig von Mises |title=Bureaucracy | origyear=1944 |url=http://www.mises.org/etexts/bureaucracy.pdf |accessdate=2006-11-10 | year=1962 }} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Montesquieu|first=Baron de|authorlink=Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu |title=The Spirit of Laws (translated in English by Thomas Nugent, revised by J. V. Prichard)|year=1748|url=http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol.htm|chapter=Book XI: Of the Laws Which Establish Political Liberty, with Regard to the Constitution, Chapters 6–7}} |
|||
*{{de icon}} {{cite book|last=Nietzsche|first=Friedrich|authorlink=Friedrich Nietzsche |title=Zur Genealogie der Moral - Eine Streitschrift|year=1887|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/nietzsch/genealog/genealog.htm|chapter=Zweite Abhandlung: "Schuld", "schlechtes Gewissen" und Verwandtes}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=The Athenian Revolution: Essays on Ancient Greek Democracy and Political Theory|first=Josiah|last=Ober|year=1996|isbn=0-691-00190-1|publisher=Princeton University Press|chapter=The Nature of Athenian Democracy}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Olson, David M. |first=Norton, Philip |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=The New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe |year=1996 |publisher=Frank Cass (UK)|location= | isbn= 0-714-64261-4 |chapter=Legislatures in Democratic Transition}} |
|||
*{{el icon}} {{cite book |last=Papachristou |first=T.K. |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=Sociology of Law |year=1999 |publisher=A.N. Sakkoulas Publishers |location=Athens |isbn=9-601-50106-1|chapter=The Sociological Approach of Law}} |
|||
*{{cite book|first=A.Z.|last=Pelczynski|year=1984|title=The State and Civil Society|publisher=Cambridge University Press}} |
|||
*{{cite encyclopedia|title=Procedural law|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica|date=2002}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Proudhon |first=Pierre |authorlink=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|title=''[[What is Property?|What is Property? or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government]]'' (original French: ''Qu'est-ce que la propriété? ou Recherche sur le principe du Droit et du Gouvernment'') |year=1840 |chapter=Chapter I (Method Pursued in this Book – The Idea of a Revolution)}} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Raz |first=Joseph |authorlink=Joseph Raz |title=The Authority of Law, Essays on Law and Morality|year=1979 |publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=0198254938 }} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Max Weber on Law and Economy in Society|year=1954|last=Rheinstein| first=M.|publisher=Harvard University Press}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Riker |first=William H. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1992 |month=January |title=The Justification of Bicameralism |journal=International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=101–116 |id= |url=http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0192-5121(199201)13%3A1%3C101%3ATJOB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C |accessdate= }} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Crimes Against Humanity|first=Geoffrey|last=Robertson|authorlink=Geoffrey Robertson|year=2006|publisher=Penguin|isbn=9780141024639}} |
|||
*{{cite encyclopedia|title=Roman law|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica|date=2002}} |
|||
*{{fr icon}} {{cite journal |quotes= |last=Rottleuthner |first=Hubert |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1989 |month=December |title=La Sociologie du Droit en Allemagne |journal=Droit et Société |volume=11 |issue= |pages=101–120 |id= |url=http://www.reds.msh-paris.fr/publications/revue/pdf/ds11-12/ds011012-05.pdf |accessdate=2007-02-10}} |
|||
*{{de icon}} {{cite journal |quotes= |last=Rottleuthner |first=Hubert |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1984 |month= |title=Rechtstheoritische Probleme der Sociologie des Rechts. Die Kontroverse zwischen Hans Kelsen und Eugene Ehlrich (1915/17) |journal=Rechtstheorie |volume=5 |issue= |pages=521–551}} |
|||
*{{fr icon}} {{cite book|last=Rousseau|first=Jean-Jacques|authorlink=Jean-Jacques Rousseau|title=The Social Contract (translated in English by G. D. H. Cole)|year=1762|url=http://www.constitution.org/jjr/socon.htm |chapter= Book II: Chapter 6 (Law)}} |
|||
*{{de icon}} {{cite book|title=Das Recht des Besitzes|first=Friedrich Carl von|last=Savigny|authorlink=Friedrich Carl von Savigny|year=1803|chapter=Zu welcher Classe von Rechten gehört der Besitz?|url=http://dlib-pr.mpier.mpg.de/m/kleioc/0010/exec/books/%22235083%}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=International Institutional Law|first=Henry G.|last=Schermers|coauthors=Blokker, Niels M.|year=1995|publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publisher|location=The Hague/London/Boston| chapter=Supervision and Sactions}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Commercial Law|first=L.S.|last=Sealy|coauthor=Hooley, R.J.A.|year=2003|publisher=LexisNexis Butterworths}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Smith |first=Stephen A. |year=2003 |month=winter |title=The Structure of Unjust Enrichment Law: Is Restitution a Right or a Remedy |journal=Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review |volume=36 |issue=2 |pages=1037–1062 |id= |url=http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v36-issue2/smith.pdf |accessdate=2007-02-09}} |
|||
*{{cite book|first=Peter|last=Stein|title=Roman Law in European History|year=1999|pages=32|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-64372-4}} |
|||
*{{cite encyclopedia|last=Théodoridés|first=Aristide|year=1999 | title = law | encyclopedia = Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt| publisher = Routledge (UK) | id = 0-415-18589-0}} |
|||
*{{cite book| first=Russ|last=VerSteeg|title=Law in Ancient Egypt|year=2002|isbn=0-89089-978-9}} |
|||
*{{cite book|title=Re-Examining Progressive Halakhah edited by Walter Jacob, Moshe Zemer|first=Mark|last=Washofsky|year=2002|publisher=Berghahn Books|isbn=1-571-81404-3|chapter=Taking Precedent Seriously}} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Weber|first=Max|authorlink=Max Weber|title=Economy and Society, Volume I (Translated and edited by By Claus Wittich, Ephraim Fischoff, and Guenther Roth)|year=1978|publisher=University of California Press|id= 0-520-03500-3|chapter=Bureaucracy and Political Leadership}} |
|||
*{{Cite wikisource|Politics as a Vocation|[[Max Weber|Weber, Max]] (1919)}} |
|||
*{{cite book|last=Weber|first=Max|authorlink=Max Weber|title=The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (Edited with Introduction by Talcott Parsons – Translated in English by A. M. Henderson)|year=1964|publisher=The Free Press of Glencoe|id= ASIN B-000-LRHAX-2}} |
|||
*{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Wehberg|first=Hans |year=1959 |month=October |title=Pacta Sunt Servanda|journal=The American Journal of International Law|volume=53 |issue=4 |pages=775–786 |url=http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9300%28195910%2953%3A4%3C775%3APSS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6&size=SMALL}} |
|||
</div> |
|||
===Online sources=== |
|||
<div class="references-small"> |
|||
*{{cite web|title=A Brief Overview of the Supreme Court|url=http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/briefoverview.pdf|publisher=Supreme Court of the United States|accessdate=2006-11-10}} |
|||
*{{cite web|last=Bix|first=Brian|title=John Austin|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/austin-john/|work=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]|accessdate=2007-02-14}} |
|||
*{{cite web | title = C-26/62 ''Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlanse Administratie Der Belastingen'' | url=http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61962J0026:EN:HTML | publisher = Eur-Lex| accessdate = 2007-01-19}} |
|||
*{{fr icon}} {{cite web|title=Des Sergents de Ville et Gardiens de la Paix à la Police de Proximité : la Préfecture de Police au Service des Citoyens|publisher =La Préfecture de Police de Paris |url=http://www.prefecture-police-paris.interieur.gouv.fr/documentation/bicentenaire/theme_expo4.htm |
|||
|accessdate = 2007-01-24}} |
|||
*{{de icon}} {{cite web|title=Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts (Decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court)|publisher=[[Federal Constitutional Court of Germany|Bundesverfassungsgericht]]|url=http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen.html|accessdate=2006-11-10}} |
|||
*{{cite web|last=Green|first=Leslie|title=Legal Positivism| work=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/|accessdate=2006-12-10}} |
|||
*{{cite web|title=History of Police Forces|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldjudgmt.htm|work=History.com Encyclopedia|accessdate=2006-12-10}} |
|||
*{{cite web|title=House of Lords Judgements|url=http://www.history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=219522|publisher=House of Lords|accessdate=2006-11-10}} |
|||
*{{fr_icon}} {{cite web|title=Jurisprudence, publications, documentation |url= http://www.courdecassation.fr/jurisprudence_publications_documentation_2/ | publisher = [[Court of Cassation (France)|Cour de cassation]]|accessdate=2007-02-11}} |
|||
*{{cite web |url=http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=1111&bold=|||| |title=law |accessdate=2007-02-10 |format= |work=Law.com Dictionary}} |
|||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=law&searchmode=none | title=law |accessdate=2007-02-09 |work= Online Etymology Dictionary}} |
|||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/legal |title=legal |accessdate=2007-02-09 |work= Mirriam-Webster's Online Dictionary}} |
|||
*{{cite web | title=Magna Carta| url= http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/magnacarta.html | publisher =[[Fordham University]]|accessdate=2006-11-10}} |
|||
*{{cite web | last=Marmor | first=Andrei |url= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lawphil-theory/ | title= The Pure Theory of Law | accessdate=2007-02-09 | work= Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|year=1934 }} |
|||
*{{cite web|url=http://www.icc-cpi.int/statesparties.html|title=The States Parties to the Rome Statute|publisher = [[International Criminal Court]] |accessdate=2007-02-10}} |
|||
*{{cite web|title=The World Factbook — Field Listing – Legal system| url=https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2100.html| publisher =[[CIA]]|accessdate=2007-10-13}} |
|||
</div> |
|||
==Further reading== |
|||
<div class="references-small"> |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Austin |first=John |authorlink=John Austin (legal philosopher) |title=[[The Province of Jurisprudence Determined]] |year=1831 |publisher= |location= |isbn= }} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Hart |first=H. L. A. |authorlink=H. L. A. Hart |title=[[The Concept of Law]] |year=1961 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-876122-8}} |
|||
*{{cite book |title=Major Legal Systems in the World Today: An Introduction to the Comparative Study of Law| quotes= |last=René|first=David |coauthors=Brierley, John E. C. | year=1985 |publisher=Stevens |location=London|isbn=0-420-47340-8}} |
|||
</div> |
|||
==External links== |
|||
{{sisterlinks|Law}} |
|||
{{Wikibookspar|Wikiversity|School of Law}} |
|||
;Judicial sources |
|||
*[http://curia.europa.eu/en/transitpage.htm The European Court of Justice Webpage] |
|||
*[http://www.echr.coe.int/echr The European Court of Human Rights' Webpage] |
|||
; Dictionaries |
|||
* [http://dictionary.law.com Law.com]. |
|||
* [[wikt:Appendix:Legal terms|Wiktionary Appendix on legal terms]]. |
|||
;Other sources |
|||
*[http://ausicl.com The Australian Institute of Comparative Legal Systems] |
|||
*[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]: |
|||
**[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/law-ideology/ Law and Ideology] |
|||
**[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/law-language/ Law and Language] |
|||
**[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lawphil-nature/ The Nature of Law] |
|||
*[http://en.jurispedia.org/ The shared law] in [[Jurispedia]] |
|||
*[http://web.upmf-grenoble.fr/Haiti/Cours/Ak The Roman Law Library] |
|||
;News and links |
|||
*[http://www.findlaw.com/ FindLaw (US)] |
|||
*[http://www.legalday.com/ LegalDay (UK)] |
|||
;Legislation and case law |
|||
*[http://www.worldlii.org/ WorldLII - World Legal Information Institute] |
|||
*[http://www.asianlii.org/ AsianLII - Asian Legal Information Institute] |
|||
*[http://www.austlii.edu.au/ AustLII - Australasian Legal Information Institute] |
|||
*[http://www.bailii.org/ Bailii - British and Irish Legal Information Institute] |
|||
*[http://www.nzlii.org/ NZLII - New Zealand Legal Information Institute] |
|||
*[http://www.paclii.org/ PacLII - Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute] |
|||
*[http://www.law.cornell.edu/ LII - Legal Information Institute (US - Cornell Law School)] |
|||
{{Law}} |
|||
{{featured article}} |
|||
[[Category:Law|*]] |
|||
[[Category:Social sciences]] |
|||
[[Category:Humanities]] |
|||
[[af:Reg]] |
|||
[[ar:قانون]] |
|||
[[an:Dreito]] |
|||
[[ast:Drechu]] |
|||
[[bn:আইন]] |
|||
[[bs:Pravo]] |
|||
[[bg:Право]] |
|||
[[ca:Dret]] |
|||
[[ceb:Pamalaod]] |
|||
[[cs:Právo]] |
|||
[[co:Drittu]] |
|||
[[cy:Cyfraith]] |
|||
[[da:Retsvidenskab]] |
|||
[[de:Recht]] |
|||
[[el:Δίκαιο]] |
|||
[[es:Derecho]] |
|||
[[eo:Juro]] |
|||
[[fa:حقوق (قانونی)]] |
|||
[[fr:Droit]] |
|||
[[fy:Rjocht]] |
|||
[[ga:Dlí]] |
|||
[[gv:Leigh]] |
|||
[[gl:Dereito]] |
|||
[[zh-classical:法律]] |
|||
[[ko:법]] |
|||
[[hr:Pravo]] |
|||
[[io:Yuro]] |
|||
[[ia:Derecto]] |
|||
[[is:Lög]] |
|||
[[it:Diritto]] |
|||
[[he:משפטים]] |
|||
[[lad:Dirito]] |
|||
[[la:Ius]] |
|||
[[li:Rech]] |
|||
[[jbo:flalu]] |
|||
[[hu:Jog]] |
|||
[[mk:Право]] |
|||
[[mi:Ture]] |
|||
[[ms:Undang-undang]] |
|||
[[nl:Recht]] |
|||
[[ja:法 (法学)]] |
|||
[[no:Rettsvitenskap]] |
|||
[[nrm:Loué]] |
|||
[[pl:Prawo]] |
|||
[[pt:Direito]] |
|||
[[ro:Drept]] |
|||
[[ru:Право]] |
|||
[[simple:Law]] |
|||
[[sk:Právo]] |
|||
[[sl:Pravo]] |
|||
[[fi:Laki]] |
|||
[[sv:Juridik]] |
|||
[[tl:Batas]] |
|||
[[ta:சட்டம்]] |
|||
[[th:กฎหมาย]] |
|||
[[vi:Luật pháp]] |
|||
[[tr:Hukuk]] |
|||
[[uk:Право]] |
|||
[[ur:قانون]] |
|||
[[yi:געזעץ]] |
|||
[[zh-yue:法律]] |
|||
[[zh:法律]] |
|||
[[zh:法学]] |
|||