COMMON LAW (UK) AND ROMAN LAW (SPAIN)

HOW I WAS SHOCKED BY THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COMMON LAW (UK) AND ROMAN LAW (SPAIN)

Over the years, justice has been provided differently around the world. There are a lot of different legal systems around the world but I would like to focus this article on two of these systems.

Firstly, it should be pointed out that ‘’Common Law´´, which was developed during the Middle Ages in England and was propagated to the colonies of the British Empire and other Countries, is based on jurisprudence. The Tribunals give decisions on each individual case. Secondly, it can be noted that in the ‘’Roman law system´´, which comes from Napoleon’s Code tradition, lawyers interpret the law making by use of different codes.

I consider that the differences between these two systems create a relevant issue and this is something that I have noticed here in the UK. The Common Law system is based on sink justice with commonsense because that shows the most rational way to resolve situations concerning problems according to the law. The principal difference is in London, people live in a jurisprudence system and although they have a constitution, it isn’t written down in the form of codes.

Furthermore, there are some differences between lawyers. There are Barristers and Solicitors. Solicitors are lawyers who receive the cases at first and Barristers are lawyers who are legitimated to be able to take part in Court.

Barristers and Judges have to wear wigs and gowns. However, there are some exceptions. For example, Barristers and Judges often remove their wings when children give evidence in Court, so as not to intimidate them. The first time I saw their wigs I was shocked and fascinated by how funny they looked. At that time, I thought that I would never get used to working with judges that look like Santa Claus because they must wear red costumes very similar to Santa Claus’ costume. That's not serious! Now, after having observed this situation several times, I still haven't got used to these wigs.

Judges have a duty to support people who have honourable behaviour and they have a duty to punish people who have breached the law or who have attempted to harm someone.

It is difficult to know the precise facts about trials but a Court has to do its best to be accurate. To achieve this challenge, there is a jury which is composed of twelve people. They have to swear an oath before taking part in the Court. They are citizens who are chosen because all citizens are legally required to join the jury if they are called to join. Only those who have honourable behaviour and have not have been involved in a legal problem before are chosen. The development of the process is gradual. That means that there are some stages before arriving at the verdict.

There are different types of Court depending on the trial or depending on the crime. The most serious cases are sent to the High Court. When someone is sentenced, he or she can be found guilty or acquitted. If the jury finds the defendant guilty, he must be punished and if the jury finds the defendant not guilty, the defendant is considered acquitted.

Another difference that can be noticed is that in London, everybody can go to the Old Bailey to see the cases because they are public.

Finally, I would like to recommend visiting the Old Bailey and watching some cases. You can choose the type of case you want. It could be about robbery, theft, burglary, mugging, smuggling, shoplifting, kidnapping, fraud, bribery, murder, manslaughter, arson, vandalism, looting and sometimes you could even take a seat and watch a terrorism case.