Talk:Civil law (common law)

Dead link

"The term "civil law" is not ordinarily used in the United States to refer to the subject matter of a civil code, in opposition, for example, to "commercial law". source : an introduction to the legal system of the united states, Allan Farnsworth, 3rd edition, 1996 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.194.8.73 (talk) 13:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The BBC link at the bottom of the page is broken. Somebody should either add the correct link or delete the link. Techyactor15 (talk) 21:12, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find an archived copy of the linked web page. However, see WP:DEADREF. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Cut

I have cut the following passage. There is no source. The words "much less serious" are an expression of opinion and need to be attributed to the person whose opinion they are. The statement is not obviously true. In particular, the number of regulatory offences and the controversial content of some offences makes it questionable. James500 (talk) 00:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Civil cases are usually much less serious than criminal offences.

A possible source: [2]. It is specifically concerned with torts that are not also crimes. James500 (talk) 02:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC) Something similar, though it is concerned with public perception rather actual seriousness: [3]. James500 (talk) 02:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal

In common law countries (Anglo-American law), "civil law" means non-criminal law. Whatever it means in Continental law, it cannot mean non-criminal law, because Roman law does not have criminal law. Unless the concept of criminal law has been imported into Continental law since the last time I checked. James500 (talk) 14:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC) For the avoidance of doubt, the distinction between public and private law on the Continent is not the same thing as the distinction between criminal and civil law in England. It is something different. James500 (talk) 14:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

According to our articles, in Continental law "civil law" does not include constitutional and administrative law. In Anglo-American law it does. Ergo they are not the same thing. James500 (talk) 15:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Defending two poor articles, rather than look to improve them?! Littledogboy (talk) 19:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

We don't merge articles on different subjects just because they are unsatisfactory. If the articles Murder and Banana were both "poor" you wouldn't propose to merge them together, would you? Because they are not the same thing. And neither, as far as I can see, are the subjects of these two articles. James500 (talk) 10:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC) yes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.211.191 (talk • contribs)

James500 is correct. Articles are about subjects. If the same name is used for two subjects, they should each get different articles that describe the subjects, not the names. If there is danger that the two may be confused, a hatnote can be used to distinguish them (with additional text if necessary).

And James, I know you used Murder and Banana as an absurd example, but sadly, it's no more absurd than the current proposal to merge a Ninth Circuit trademark law case with a pop song. TJRC (talk) 23:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

And I am saying, it is lazyness not to explain to the reader what the difference is (as in say Manslaughter and Murder, were they only short articles). Anyway, are you like working on this masterpiece? As it stands, it could simply be redirected to civil procedure... Although, wait, civil procedure is in an even more sorry state... Oh dear. Littledogboy (talk) 18:46, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

(1) Explaining the difference is what disambiguation pages are for. (2) This page can't be redirected to Civil procedure because civil procedure doesn't include substantive law. (3) Glanville Williams is a good enough source to support any article. James500 (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, James. In this article I'd hope to find what is civil law (area of law), other than civil procedure, ie a mention and link to civil procudure, as it has its own article, plus what is the body of law that is substantive civil law. Alas, terms substantive and procedure are not even mentioned. Littledogboy (talk) 12:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I have made this edit. I will have to source it later. James500 (talk) 12:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you reckon Mr Glanville would say judicial review belong in civil law? Littledogboy (talk) 21:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

What he said was something to the effect of "all the law that is not criminal law". That would include the law relating to judicial review because it is not a criminal proceeding. James500 (talk) 15:19, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

In civil law systems "civil law" means non-criminal law, exactly like in Common law systems, so the first sentence is quite deceitful. And in Civil law system there is a Criminal law indeed, like in Common law systems. Usually in codified law systems there are at least four codes: civil code, criminal code, civil procedure code, criminal procedure code. Often there is also a Commercial code. Moreover, there are the administrative law and the tax law, which are not always codified and have separate courts. Finally, or first of all, there is a Constitution. Usually in civil law systems we call "private law" the civil law in strict sense, in which both parties are private citizens, and "public law" the other branches of law in which one party is a Public Body: criminal law, administrative law, tax law, constitutional law. Lele giannoni (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I assume that the first sentence you are referring to is the one in the hatnote. How about changing it to: "This article is about law that is not criminal law". Perhaps the page should be moved to "Civil law (non-criminal law)" for the sake of clarity. I suspect that the present title isn't a reference to civil law in common law countries. I suspect it might be a reference to the fact that English lawyers sometimes apply the term "common law" to all law that is neither equity nor criminal law (Williams, Learning the Law, 11ed, p 25). James500 (talk) 03:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I have changed the hatnote. James500 (talk) 03:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

"Civil law means non-criminal law"

Well, as a citizen of the continent I may have a different perspective, but IMHO there are different fields of law outside both civil and criminal law, like tax law, administrative law and constitutional law. Criminal differs from civil insofar that in criminal law one of the parties is the government (the state), but that applies to tax law as well. Rbakels (talk) 11:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The expression "civil law" has a number of distinct different meanings. The other meanings are (or should be) dealt with in other articles because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This particular definition is supported by sources that are unequivocally reliable.

The article you want is probably Civil law (area) which is about Continental law. In England, rules of tax law, administrative law and constitutional law must be either civil law or criminal law but they can't be neither. The second edition of "Constitutional & Administrative Law" by Hilaire Barnett, for example, includes, at pages 701 to 713, a discussion of a number of criminal offences.

In England, the distinction between civil and criminal law has nothing to do with whether the State is a party to proceedings. The Crown can be sued for its torts under the Crown Proceedings Act 1947. This is an example of the State being a party to civil proceedings. At common law any private person can initiate criminal proceedings against another private person, whether he is a victim of the offence or not (in Scotland he must be the victim). This is an example of criminal proceedings to which the State is not a party. James500 (talk) 05:47, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

...hmm, the common-law thinking really seems to be heavily based in procedure. But even on the continent, civil law historically used to equal private law (as opposed to public law), which only later branched into other distinct areas like family law, commercial law, labour law, etc. Littledogboy (talk) 18:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Cut

I am going to cut the following passage. I don't think it adds anything useful to the article now that it has been expanded. The source is a dead link and the BBC is no great authority on this subject:

Civil law is the branch of law dealing with disputes between individuals or organizations, in which compensation may be awarded to the victim. For instance, if a car crash victim claims damages against the driver for loss or injury sustained in an accident, this will be a civil law case. Civil law differs from criminal law, which emphasises more upon punishment than on dispute resolution.

James500 (talk) 18:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done with this edit. James500 (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I am going to cut the following words: "Under common law, civil law is the area of laws which affect individual legal status". I think this is actually a definition of private law. Whilst there is some evidence that private law is one of the many things referred to as "civil law", even in common law countries, (e.g. [4]), that is not what this article is about (clearly there are some public duties which don't have criminal consequences because they only result in judicial review). James500 (talk) 08:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done with this edit. I also removed the next sentence because it was deprived of context. James500 (talk) 08:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I am going to cut the following material. It is unreferenced, it is not obviously true in all cases, some of it is definitely not wholly accurate, the article now has what I think is a sufficient minimum mass of referenced material, and removing it will allow me to remove the "verify" tag.

Purpose

The objectives of civil law are different from other types of law. In civil law there is the attempt to right a wrong, fulfill obligations set in place by an agreement, or settle a dispute. If there is a victim, they get compensation, and the culprit pays, somewhat based upon the principle of 'an eye for an eye' but in a civil and sophisticated manner, as opposed to full-fledged revenge. If it is an equity matter, there is often a pie for division and it gets allocated by a process of civil law, possibly invoking the doctrines of equity. In criminal law the objective is usually deterrence, and retribution.

An action in criminal law does not necessarily preclude an action in civil law in common law countries, and may provide a mechanism for compensation to the victims of crime.

Civil law in common law countries usually refers to both common law and the law of equity, which while now merged in administration, have different traditions, and have historically operated to different doctrines, although this dualism is increasingly being set aside so there is one coherent body of law centred around common principles of law.

Difference from criminal law

In many countries such as the USA and UK, criminal law has to prove that a party is guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" when a case verdict is reached in court. Civil law operates differently, . . .

James500 (talk) 19:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done. James500 (talk) 19:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Replaced material redacted from the above. James500 (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Comment

Please note that we have had the following text since 21 February 2011, three years before the source cited in the article was first published:

In civil law cases, the "burden of proof" requires the plaintiff to convince the trier of fact (whether judge or jury) of the plaintiff's entitlement to the relief sought. This means that the plaintiff must prove each element of the claim, or cause of action, in order to recover.

James500 (talk) 19:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Page name

I think the present page name is unsatisfactory. Civil law, in the sense of law that is not criminal law, is partly statutory. And one of the meanings of "common law" is law that is not statutory. Replacing it with "Anglo-American law" would avoid that problem, but would not prevent confusion with law that is not military law. James500 (talk) 23:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Irrelevant material that belongs somewhere else

This article is about the concept of non-criminal law in Anglo-American law. It is not about the concept of private law in Roman law, which is something different. I am therefore going to cut the following passage from the article, because it is about Ukrainian private law, which is not within the scope of this article.

Principles of civil law are basic principles, the most general guidelines (principles) of civil law that have obligatory nature by virtue of their legal assignment. The meaning of civil law principles lies in the fact that they:

1) reflect essence of social orientation and major branch features of civil regulation, i.e. each further norm in its content must be penetrated by the principle of civil law;

2) are taken into account when concluding non-nominate contracts;

3) are taken into account when applying the analogy of law;

4) are taken into account when protecting the legally protected interest.

The above passage probably belongs, if anywhere, in the article Civil law (area). James500 (talk) 23:35, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

References

Relief

I believe this article is factually wrong:"It is often suggested that civil proceedings are taken for the purpose of obtaining compensation for injury..." I believe that 'compensation' is wrong, or at least highly misleading. Civil proceedings are undertaken for relief, enforcement, or compensation. (Not being a lawyer or a legal scholar, this is just my 2 cents). A judgement may require a certain action, or cessation of acts, or monetary (or other) compensation as well as punitive awards, it may also (I think) require 3rd party (eg law enforcement) intervention. In common usage, "compensation" implies either monetary (or other real property asset) exchange and wouldn't, for example, be considered to be the correct term for a "cease and desist" order.Abitslow (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 25 April 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 13:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

---

Civil law (common law) → Civil law (branch of law) – Civil law, as a branch of law, exists not only in the common law legal systems, but also in the continental law, legal systems based on Roman law. Civil law is one of areas of private law. BlueDolin (talk) 08:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is a confusion of terms. While the two terms look the same, they refer to 2 completely different concepts. The Civil law (legal system) means something different from what "civil law" means under the common law system. The civil law system found in continental Europe is basically a legal system whose foundations is statutes (as opposed to judicial ruling precedents in the common law system) and encompasses criminal laws. Under the common law system, "civil law" just means private lawsuits, as opposed to criminal law prosecutions. The term "civil law" in the common law system has nothing to do with laws based on statutes. Civil law actions in the common law system can be based on judicial precedents alone and not statutes. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support This article is not about a topic that is unique to common law systems, but a branch of law of that exists in (pretty much) all legal systems. I don't understand how it ever got its current title. --MrStoofer (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@MrStoofer: Because tort law is not called "civil law" in civil law systems. Only common law systems use the term "civil law" to refer to tort law. The use of the term "civil law" to refer to tort law (as opposed to criminal law) is unique to common law systems. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

"Civil law", in the sense used in this article, is a lot wider than tort law. The fact that you expressed yourself in this way tells me that you are not a lawyer and so should perhaps be wary of opining on this topic. MrStoofer (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I am a licensed attorney in a common law jurisdiction. And to the extent this article discusses things outside of tort law (or other non-criminal law actions such as administrative fines or civil infractions) under the common law legal system, it is exceeding its scope. That material belongs in the Civil law (legal system) article, not here. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:18, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Community Economic and Social Development II

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 12 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sangeen001 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Michelle312 (talk) 02:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC)