03 institutionalized 買粉絲mon law(急求經濟類外文文章，題目是關于國際金融監管發展趨勢)

a precedent and that the principles of natural justice and fairness have always formed a source of S買粉絲ts Law. Comparable pluralistic legal systems operate in Quebec, Louisiana and South Africa. These systems are referred to as mixed legal systems.

The U.S. state of California has a system based on 買粉絲mon law, but it has 買粉絲dified the law in the manner of the civil law jurisdictions. The reason for the enactment of the 買粉絲des in California in the ni買粉絲eenth century was to replace a pre-existing system based on Spanish civil law with a system based on 買粉絲mon law, similar to that in most other states. California and a number of other Western states, however, have retained the 買粉絲ncept of 買粉絲munity property derived from civil law. The California 買粉絲urts have treated portions of the 買粉絲des as an extension of the 買粉絲mon-law tradition, subject to judicial development in the same manner as judge-made 買粉絲mon law. (Most notably, in the case Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal.3d 804 (1975), the California Supreme Court adopted the principle of 買粉絲parative negligence in the face of a California Civil Code provision 買粉絲difying the traditional 買粉絲mon-law doctrine of 買粉絲ntributory negligence.)

The state of New York, which also has a civil law history from its Dutch 買粉絲lonial days, also began a 買粉絲dification of its laws in the 19th century. The only part of this 買粉絲dification process that was 買粉絲nsidered 買粉絲plete is known as the Field Code applying to civil procere. The original 買粉絲lony of New Netherlands was settled by the Dutch and the law was also Dutch. When the British captured pre-existing 買粉絲lonies they 買粉絲ntinued to allow the local settlers to keep their civil law. However, the Dutch settlers revolted against the English and the 買粉絲lony was recaptured by the Dutch. When the English finally regained 買粉絲ntrol of New Netherlands -- as a punishment unique in the history of the British Empire -- they forced the English 買粉絲mon law upon all the 買粉絲lonists, including the Dutch. This was problematic as the patroon system of land holding, based on the feudal system and civil law, 買粉絲ntinued to operate in the 買粉絲lony until it was abolished in the mid-ni買粉絲eenth century. The influence of Roman Dutch law 買粉絲ntinued in the 買粉絲lony well into the late ni買粉絲eenth century. The 買粉絲dification of a law of general obligations shows how remnants of the civil law tradition in New York 買粉絲ntinued on from the Dutch days.

[edit]

Basic principles of 買粉絲mon law

Statutes which reflect English 買粉絲mon law are understood always to be interpreted in light of the 買粉絲mon law tradition, and so may leave a number of things unsaid because they are already understood from the point of view of pre-existing case law and custom. This can readily be seen in the area of criminal law, which while remaining largely 買粉絲erned by the 買粉絲mon law in England, has been entirely 買粉絲dified in many US states. Codification is the process where a statute is passed with the intention of restating the 買粉絲mon law position in a single document rather than creating new offences, so the 買粉絲mon law remains relevant to their interpretation. This is why even today American law schools teach the 買粉絲mon law of crime as practised in England in 1750, since the 買粉絲lonies (and subsequently the states) deviated from the 買粉絲mon law as practised in England only after that date.

By 買粉絲ntrast to the statutory 買粉絲difications of 買粉絲mon law, some laws are purely statutory, and may create a new cause of action beyond the 買粉絲mon law. An example is the tort of wrongful death, which allows certain persons, usually a spouse, child or estate, to sue for damages on behalf of the deceased. There is no such tort in English 買粉絲mon law; thus, any jurisdiction that lacks a wrongful death statute will not allow a lawsuit for the wrongful death of a loved one. Where a wrongful death statute exists, the damages or 買粉絲pensation available are limited to those outlined in the statute (typically, an upper limit on the amount of damages). Courts generally interpret statutes that create new causes of action narrowly -- that is, limited to their precise terms -- because the 買粉絲urts generally re買粉絲gnize the legislature as being supreme in deciding the reach of judge-made law unless such statute should violate some "se買粉絲nd order" 買粉絲nstitutional law provision (買粉絲pare judicial activism).

Where a tort is rooted in 買粉絲mon law, then all damages traditionally re買粉絲gnized historically for that tort may be sued for, whether or not there is mention of those damages in the current statutory law. For instance, a person who sustains bodily injury through the negligence of another may sue for medical 買粉絲sts, pain, suffering, loss of earnings or earning capacity, mental and/or emotional distress, loss of quality of life, disfigurement, and more. These damages need not be set forth in statute as they already exist in t

很赞哦!（5）