The Establishment Of English Law

  • Words 703
  • Pages 2
Download PDF

The English Legal System comprises of two branches, common law and civil law

Common law:

In common law or as some may refer to it “case law”, the constitutions passed over the nation are based on judicial rulings and decrees of a court, this part of English law is structured solely on the idea of precedent. This type of law was established long ago following the Norman conquest which occurred in the middle ages in the year 1066. It was created by the King as he sort out to inaugurate policies for a structured system of justice. This event induced the establishment of new systems which would then be developed further over the years. A few being where different types of legal actions would be taken for specific infringements as well as the right for an individual not to be tried without first the judgement and ruling of his pairs, thus originating the jury

Click to get a unique essay

Our writers can write you a new plagiarism-free essay on any topic

Civil law:

This type of law, makes up the most prominent type of law used around the globe, contrary to common law it is not dependent on the judgements made from the court, but instead, is dependent on statutes systemized by a legislative entity and is validated as a country’s constitution

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Alternative Dispute Resolution can be defined as a substitute route for settling disputes between individuals through mediation or arbitration. It is increasingly being utilized for the purpose that individuals can come to a mutually agreeable solution without there being a need to resort to litigation or legal action taken in a civil court of law between said individuals.

Over the years this procedure has developed across the board and is being implemented in courts globally. In many courts ADR is compulsory before a trial can begin

Types of Alternative Dispute Resolution

Arbitration: In the type of ADR a third party individual or arbitrator intervenes in the dispute after having heard both sides of the disagreement and creates a solution for the problem in which the individuals may agree to be binding or a ruling in which individuals must abide too whether or not they are in agreement or non-binding which is a ruling that has the flexibility that individuals can choose whether or not they want to pursue such a ruling

Mediation: In this non-binding form of ADR individuals collaboratively come together at a hearing or a proceeding in which a dispute is conferred, where they make some sort of a mutual agreement on the disagreement through the help of a mediator.

Advantages to Alternative Dispute Resolution

This method has many benefits and is often favoured because firstly it is quicker, inexpensive as compared to litigation as well as it is collaborative, meaning it allows for individuals to comprehend the positions of their counterparts. It also gives flexibility for individuals to resolve disagreements more creatively. Lastly, because of its intimate and informal nature, it aids in the preservation of relationships that may not have lasted with continual conflict through legal action being taken. It attempts to educate society that solutions can be achieved more innovatively rather than with violence or litigation

Although there are numerous benefits to ADR there are also some drawbacks associated with this method. Firstly, it is absolutely inappropriate for cases of sexual harassment, domestic abuse, cases of rape and other kinds of violence due to imbalances of power, in regards to mediation. Also is no guarantee that a solution to the problem will be found as disagreements may persist through the hearing as well as there wil be additional costs to persons if a matter is not resolved and has to go to court. Lastly, skilled mediators, talented with a way of words to intercept the mindsets of others and aid in the changing of decisions to come upon a mutual agreement is difficult to come around

Personally, I believe that although the Alternative Dispute Resolution method has its advantages, it should in no way replace the courts because not all disputes can be rectified as simply. But instead, it should be looked at as a compulsory method prior to litigation, and only if all else fails the case should be tried. In this way, persons have the opportunity to save relationships and avoid conflict but also continue legal action being taken if necessary


We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.