Final answer:
Common law and Roman law are two different legal systems. Common law is based on judicial precedent, while Roman law relies on written codes and statutes. They differ in terms of the source of law, the role of judges, the use of precedent, and flexibility.
Step-by-step explanation:
Common law and Roman law are two different legal systems. Common law is a legal system developed in England and followed in countries that were once colonies of the British Empire. It is based on the principle of judicial precedent, where judges make decisions based on previous court rulings. Roman law, on the other hand, originated in ancient Rome and is the basis for most legal systems in Europe today, excluding Britain. It is a civil law system, meaning it is based on written codes and statutes.
Some key differences between common law and Roman law include:
- Source of law: Common law is derived from judicial decisions, while Roman law is based on written codes and legislation.
- Role of judges: In common law, judges play an important role in interpreting and making law through their decisions. In Roman law, judges are seen as interpreting and applying existing law rather than making new law.
- Precedent: Common law relies heavily on precedents, where previous court decisions serve as binding or persuasive authority in similar cases. Roman law also considers previous court decisions, but they do not have the same binding effect as in common law.
- Flexibility: Common law is known for its flexibility and adaptability to changing circumstances, as it allows for judge-made law. Roman law, on the other hand, is more codified and less adaptable to changing circumstances.