Free tool · History of Law
Civil Law or Common Law? Identify a Legal Tradition from Its Features
The two great Western legal traditions differ in their sources and methods. Civil-law systems, descended from Roman law and the codifications, treat comprehensive codes as the main source, have career judges, an inquisitorial style of procedure, deductive reasoning from the code and a strong role for scholars; judicial decisions are not formally binding. Common-law systems, descended from the English royal courts, treat judicial precedent as a main source, bind lower courts to higher ones, draw judges from experienced lawyers, use an adversarial procedure and often juries, and reason by analogy from case to case. Most real systems are mixed, and the differences have narrowed as statutes grow in common-law countries and precedent matters more in civil-law ones.
Tool · Legal Tradition Identifier
Closest to the common-law tradition (civil-law features 0, common-law features 13)
- Judicial precedent is a main source of law: characteristic of the common-law tradition.
- Higher-court decisions bind lower courts (stare decisis): common law.
- Judges are drawn from experienced lawyers: common law.
- The parties present the case and the judge is a neutral umpire (adversarial): common law.
- Juries decide serious cases: a mark of the common-law tradition.
- Reasoning moves from case to case by analogy: common law.
- Judges and practitioners shape the law more than scholars: typical of the common law.
- A separate body of equitable principles and remedies grew up beside the common law: a historic feature of the common law.
- No real system is purely one or the other. Scotland, Louisiana, Quebec, South Africa, Israel and many others are mixed, and most systems have borrowed from both. The Legal Families Atlas shows the traditions and their mixtures by country.
- The tool is a teaching exercise: it adds up typical features, and real classification looks at history, sources and the whole structure of the law.
Describe the main features of a legal system, real or invented, and see how far it resembles the civil-law tradition (descended from Roman law and the codes) or the common-law tradition (descended from the English courts), and why. Real systems are mixed and classification looks at history and the whole structure; this is a teaching exercise. Runs in your browser; nothing is stored or sent.
How to use it
- Choose the main source of law and the force of judicial decisions.
- Choose who the judges are, the style of procedure and reasoning.
- Tick the use of juries and a separate body of equity.
- Read how the system compares and why.
Common questions
Which countries are mixed systems?
Scotland, Louisiana, Quebec, South Africa, Israel and many others combine features of civil law and common law, and often customary or religious law.
Do civil-law judges follow precedent?
Decisions are not formally binding, but consistent lines of decisions of the highest courts carry real weight and are followed in practice.
Is the tool a classification of real countries?
No. It adds up typical features as a teaching exercise. Real classification looks at history and the whole structure of the law.
Learn the law behind the tool
This tool is part of our History of Law course, with lectures, concept maps, flashcards, interactive exercises and a capstone case. History of Law: The Common Law Tradition.
More free law tools
General information, simplified, mainly on American law, not legal advice. States and countries differ, and real cases turn on facts that a tool cannot capture.