main task deciding particular cases by applying and interpreting legal norms, in the common law the courts are supposed not only to decide disputes between particular parties but also to provide guidance as to how similar disputes should be settled in the future. In common law, in the past judges would make the law and all matters were to be addressed by the courts but now it no longer exists like that (Dammer and Albanese, 2014). In common law, when it came to “conventional cases, they judges typically based their decisions on a combination of common sense and local norms and laws” (Dammer and Albanese, 2014). Civil-law systems are more widespread than common-law systems today. One advantage of incorporating common law is that “common law judges have more authority in the sense that they can evolve the law through precedent, whereas civil law judges do not have that authority. Judges are important to competent dispute resolution whether the base system derives from the common law or civil law” (Koch). One advantage of incorporating the civil law is that the role of judges in large non- transatlantic legal cultures may make the civil law judicial model more compatible with traditional customary or religiously-based legal attitudes. That is, judges represent moral authority rather than state empowerment. The civil law judicial
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read both pages?