Common Law system Vs. Civil Law system The civil law system and the common law system are indeed two diverse legal systems. Most countries nowadays go with one of the two main legal structures: common law or civil law . Before starting the comparison of those two major legal system, we need to know what is law and why is it important to us. Law has many diverse definitions, but they are all based on the same perception which is the comprehension of enforceable guidelines that guides the relationship between people themselves and between people and society they live in. Law is important to us because it simply tells us what are our roles and obligations toward our society and other individuals .
Austin’s particular theory of law is often called the “command theory of law” because the concept of command lies at its core: law is the command of the sovereign, backed by a threat of sanction in the event of non-compliance. He distinguished positive law from positive morality which is devoid any legal sanction. In his own words, “the existence of law is one thing, its merit and demerit is another...A law which actually exists, is a law, though we happen to dislike it or though it may vary from the text by which we regulate our approbation or disapprobation
To cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. 4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of the nations in attaining these common ends. The principal judicial organ of the United Nations is the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This main body of the UN has the role to settle legal disputes submitted to it by States in accordance to the international law as well as give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it from authorized UN organs and specialized agencies.
In this definition, Hobbes asserts that law is command, not counsel and that law are the rules of just and unjust. Hobbes insists that any law must be promulgated. In order for one to know how to obey it, a law must be "signified by sufficient signs". Laws must be made known for them to actually be law. Thomas Hobbes is legal positivists.
The latter is not only limited to the question of borders but contains in general all relations between governments and inter-governmental institutions like the UN. The discipline of international relations is dealing with this more recently developing external aspect of sovereignty. (Pierson, 2011, pp. 134-135) To come back to the internal aspects: Hinsley describes sovereignty as a unique, ‘final and absolute authority’, but in addition Pierson notes, that the sovereign may not do whatever it wants. He supports his argument with Hobbes’ view, who also sees ‘limitations upon the lawful authority of the Sovereign’ and Hobbes further sees the protection of the subject as a requirement for the sovereign’s qualification.
It is diverse and covers almost the entire spectrum of relations between the two law enforcements. The fundamental nature in this regard is the Court's decision in the case of the EU 22/70 Commission v. Council . In it the Court of Justice of the European Community recognized international legal personality. The logical consequence of such recognition was for the activities of the union to be subject to the compliance with international law, as an organization that claims to be the international legal personality, cannot be opposing to international law. Activities of the EU in this case should be understood in a broad sense, including the law-making efforts through the participation in international treaties and the adoption of the EU institutions acts.
Every human in a nation or society around the world is often governed by a set of rules commonly known as law. Although the rules might be different from one nation or society with another one, but it is important and necessary in regulating human’s behaviour. Law tells us what we should do and should not do. In every nation or society, there are different type forms of rules and laws. Rule is form through morality or customs while law is enforced by the state or courts.
predominance of legal spirit (i) Supremacy of law: Explaining the first principle, Dicey states that rule of law means absolute supremacy or predominance of regular law as opposed to arbitrary powers or wide discretionary power. It excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogative or even wide discretionary authority on part of the Government. According to him English men were ruled by the law and by the law alone. The rule of law banning of rule of judge, in matters pertaining to a person or a nation. it is so imperative that the reign of law should not be reduced to anarchy by willfully lawless
In other words, once the state practice and belief are established, the custom can form binding international law. Therefore, a declaration may become binding when its provisions, key parts or principles prescribed in it are in compliance with state practice and opinio juris. There are opinions that some parts of the UNDRIP are already customary law. For instance, Professor Wiessner wrote that “UNDRIP is a solemn, comprehensive and authoritative response of the international community of States to the claims of Indigenous peoples, where maximum compliance is anticipated. Some of the rights stated in UDRP may already form part of customary
1) It must be proved that the life of a state’s citizens is under threat on the territory of foreign state 2) the other state must be unwilling or unable to offer sufficient protection, and 3) it must be an option of last/only resort. The intervening state carries the burden of proof that violations are taking place. This the most concrete widespread and uniform understanding of the scope of the right to the protection of nationals under customary international law. Its specific requirements mean that it can only fully implemented in special cases. Overall though while trying to expand further, the legality of the right to protection of nationals remains unclear.