The term "common law", referring to the body of law made by the judiciary, is often distinguished from statutory law and regulations, which are laws adopted by the legislature and executive respectively. In legal systems that follow the common law, judicial precedent stands in contrast to and on equal footing with statutes. The other major legal system used by countries is the civil law, which codifies its legal principles into legal codes and does not treat judicial opinions as binding.
Supposing a judge in the past made a mistake, or was biased , or gave a bad judgement for any other reason , do later judges have to apply it today ? If so This seems to suggest that judges are infallible. Ard they ?
Common law isnt case law Common law/ natural law/gods law is no loss no harm no injury no fraud and be a good person. Anything made by man is not above common law because gods law is the law of the land
In true common law, there are no obligatory rules or precedents. Many have come to respect the thoughts and opinions of those who preceded them. Having respect does not mean to quit thinking.
Nonsense. In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions.
British Constitution practices democracy through fictional citizen representation. British legal system doesn't have people representation. Therefore case law practied by British judiciary is not common law of the sovereign.
In your lecture you mentioned about judges who were the agents of sovereign king. They were consistent in decisions by referring to prior cases. That doesn't mean Common law is case law. Sovereign decree the law directly or through agencies. Therefore, common law is sovereign's law.
She is absolutely wrong. Again I will say if she was familiar with Blackstone she would know that what she said is not true. If you don’t believe me read Blackstone.
She takes one quote from Blackstone to prove her point and claims he was the expert. Blackstone also said in his commentaries that the slightly defect in the Common law had to be remedied by the legislature. If it was indeed judge made law this would not be the case.
BEST lecture on common law!
Common law is in fact case law in the sense tha judicial precedents are binding
No victim/no crime
The term "common law", referring to the body of law made by the judiciary, is often distinguished from statutory law and regulations, which are laws adopted by the legislature and executive respectively. In legal systems that follow the common law, judicial precedent stands in contrast to and on equal footing with statutes. The other major legal system used by countries is the civil law, which codifies its legal principles into legal codes and does not treat judicial opinions as binding.
@user-xj2im1ep3o Of course, a law is a law and therefore is a new law that not have to relate to any previous law.
@user-xj2im1ep3o I totally agree, any new law can be a fully independent law.
Supposing a judge in the past made a mistake, or was biased , or gave a bad judgement for any other reason , do later judges have to apply it today ?
If so This seems to suggest that judges are infallible.
Ard they ?
Very informative!
❤❤❤
Common law isnt case law
Common law/ natural law/gods law is no loss no harm no injury no fraud and be a good person. Anything made by man is not above common law because gods law is the law of the land
Civil is maritime/admiralty.
Hello, may I know, the honourable lecturer is referring to what text book in this lecture? So that i can follow thoroughly.
Does anyone know the lecturer's name? 'She's great and I would like to find more of her lectures!
Dame Hazel Genn is a professor of socio-legal studies.
In true common law, there are no obligatory rules or precedents.
Many have come to respect the thoughts and opinions of those who preceded them. Having respect does not mean to quit thinking.
Nonsense. In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions.
7:47 TRIAL BY ORDEAL
British Constitution practices democracy through fictional citizen representation. British legal system doesn't have people representation. Therefore case law practied by British judiciary is not common law of the sovereign.
In your lecture you mentioned about judges who were the agents of sovereign king. They were consistent in decisions by referring to prior cases. That doesn't mean Common law is case law. Sovereign decree the law directly or through agencies. Therefore, common law is sovereign's law.
You think you are smarter than a professor...?
Where is your source?
@@elenam4339
Freethinkers are better than institutionalised professors.
@@mayomayo9557
Where do you expect sources for common law and common sense?
@@godofgodseyes statute books
You are wrong. Common law is not case law. It's the law of sovereign.
She’s wrong. Common law is not based based on judicial decisions. If she read Blackstone she would know this.
She is right Common law is based on previous judicial decisions. As anyone who looks it up will know.
She is absolutely wrong. Again I will say if she was familiar with Blackstone she would know that what she said is not true. If you don’t believe me read Blackstone.
She takes one quote from Blackstone to prove her point and claims he was the expert.
Blackstone also said in his commentaries that the slightly defect in the Common law had to be remedied by the legislature. If it was indeed judge made law this would not be the case.
She should also read The History of the Common Law by Sir Matthew Hale, 1739 page 3.