More Task II Sample Questions

Sample 1

Roman Law, in general usage, legal system developed by the Romans from the time of their first codification of law, known as the Law of the Twelve Tables (see Twelve Tables, Law of the), in 450 BC to the death of Justinian I, ruler of the Byzantine Empire, in AD 565. Specifically, the term designates the codification of law known as the Corpus Juris Civilis, also called the Justinian Code, made under the auspices of Justinian, that forms the basis of the civil law of many continental European countries.

The Early Law

Prior to the Twelve Tables, the law of Rome was religious in character, and its interpretation rested with priests, who were members of the patrician class. Complaints and agitation by the plebs, the common people, led to the reduction to writing of the existing legal customs and the addition of new principles unknown in the customary law. The Law of the Twelve Tables thus drafted was submitted to and accepted by the popular assembly. This code set forth simple rules suitable for an agricultural community; it established equal law for patricians and plebs and was prized by the Romans as the source of all public and private law. The legal system established under this code, and the body of rules that developed around it, applied exclusively to Roman citizens and was known as the jus civile.

Effects of Roman Rule

Conquest over the Mediterranean basin compelled the Romans to work out a new system of law. Each conquered territory had its own system, and a body of law was required that would be applicable to both citizens and subjects. Between about 367 BC and AD 137 the new law was developed from the edicts of the praetor, or magistrate, who defined and interpreted the law in individual cases. The praetor of the foreigners administered justice in Rome in all controversies except those in which both parties were citizens; the praetor, or provincial magistrate, patterned his edicts in matters of commercial interest after the edict of the foreign praetor in Rome. During the last century of the republic the rules of the new system were generally made applicable to controversies between Roman citizens. This new legal system was known as the jus gentium. The extension of citizenship during the years from 100 BC to AD 212 to all free inhabitants of the Roman Empire made the distinction between the jus gentium and the jus civile obsolete, and the city law or jus civile of Rome became the law of the empire. Provincial diversities were effaced by legislation by the senate and emperor and by juristic interpretation. The most significant development in the Roman legal system of this period was the right given by the first Roman emperor Augustus and his successors to eminent jurists to deliver responsa, or opinions, on the legal cases on trial in the courts. Among the most famous of these Roman jurists were Gaius (flourished 2nd century AD), Papinian, Julius Paulus (flourished 3rd century AD), and Ulpian, the last three of whom successively held the position praefectus praetoria, or minister of justice of the Roman Empire.

First Legal Code

In the 3rd century AD the decrees or laws issued by the emperors gained increasing importance in the Roman legal system. The first codification of this imperial legislation, the Codex Theodosianus, was published by Theodosius II, ruler of the Byzantine Empire, in AD 438. Theodosius entertained, but did not carry out, a broader plan, involving an official digest of the older law, as set forth in the juristic literature. Subsequently Justinian I appointed a committee of ten jurists, the most famous of whom was his chief legal minister, Tribonian, to make such a digest. The law books published by Justinian, the Institutiones (533), the Digesta or Pandecta (533), and the Codex Constitutionum (528-29; revised 534), together with the Novellae (534-65), are collectively known as the Corpus Juris Civilis.

The Institutiones of Justinian set forth the elements of Roman law and was based on the Institutiones of Gaius. It was intended primarily for law students, but was published with statutory force. The Digesta or Pandecta, composed of excerpts from the juristic literature of four centuries (from about 30 BC to AD 300), was a collection of decisions of the courts, with commentaries on various laws. The Novellae was a collection of the laws issued by Justinian and his successors. The revised Codex Constitutionum was a compilation of all imperial legislation up to AD 534.

The law books of Justinian retained the force of law in the Byzantine Empire until the end of the 9th century, when they were condensed into a single code, written in Greek and known as the Basilica. This code, in turn, remained nominally in force until the capture of Constantinople (present-day Istanbul) by the Turks in 1453. In western Europe between the 6th and the 11th centuries the principal source of Roman law was the Breviary of Alaric, compiled by Alaric II, king of the Visigoths, in 506 AD. In the 11th century, however, the law books of Justinian were studied and used in Lombardy, in southern France, and in Barcelona, Spain. In Italy, the laws of Justinian were taught in a regular law school at Pavia. Early in the 12th century a more thorough study of these texts was inaugurated at Bologna. The systematic study of Roman law spread from Italy throughout Europe from the 12th century onward. With the revival of European commerce and the inadequacy of medieval law to meet the requirements of the changing economic and social conditions, Roman law became incorporated in the legal systems of the many continental European countries.

.Contributed By:

Fritz Schwind

Courts contribute to social stability by resolving disputes in a civilized fashion. Property and contract laws facilitate business activities and private planning. Laws limiting the powers of government help to provide some degree of freedom that would not otherwise be possible. Law has also been used as a mechanism for social change; for instance, at various times laws have been passed to inhibit social discrimination and to improve the quality of individual life in matters of health, education, and welfare.

Development of Law

Law develops as society evolves. Historically, the simplest societies were tribal. The members of the tribe were bonded together initially by kinship and worship of the same gods. Even in the absence of courts and legislature there was law—a blend of custom, morality, religion, and magic. The visible authority was the ruler, or chief; the ultimate authorities were believed to be the gods whose will was revealed in the forces of nature and in the revelations of the tribal head or the priests. Wrongs against the tribe, such as sacrilege or breach of tribal custom, were met with group sanctions including ridicule and hostility, and, the tribe members thought, with the wrath of the gods. The gods were appeased in ritualistic ceremonies ending perhaps in sacrifice or expulsion of the wrongdoer. Wrongs against individuals, such as murder, theft, adultery, or failure to repay a debt, were avenged by the family of the victim, often in actions against the family of the wrongdoer. Revenge of this kind was based on tribal custom, a major component of early law.

Tribal society gradually evolved into territorial confederations. Governmental structures emerged, and modern law began to take shape. The most significant historical example is Roman law, which influenced most of the legal systems of the world. In the 8th century BC the law of Rome was still largely a blend of custom and interpretation by magistrates of the will of the gods. The magistrates later lost their legitimacy because of gross discrimination against the lower (plebeian) class. The threat of revolution led to one of the most significant developments in the history of law: the Twelve Tables of Rome, which were engraved on bronze tablets in the 5th century BC .They were largely a declaration of existing custom concerning such matters as property, payment of debts, and appropriate compensation or other remedies for damage to persons. The Twelve Tables serve as a historical basis for the widespread modern belief that fairness in law demands that it be in written form. These tables and their Roman successors, including the Justinian Code, led to civil-law codes that provide the main source of law in much of modern Europe, South America, and elsewhere. The common-law systems of England, and later of the U.S., developed in a different manner. Before the Norman Conquest (1066), England was a loose confederation of societies, the laws of which were largely tribal and local. The Anglo-Norman rulers created a system of centralized courts that operated under a single set of laws that superseded the rules laid down by earlier societies. This legal system, known as the common law of England, began with common customs, but over time it involved the courts in lawmaking that was responsive to changes in society. Modern legislatures and administrative agencies produce a much greater quantity of formal law, but the judiciary remains very important because of the continued vitality of the common-law approach even in matters of constitutional and statutory interpretations. Increasingly in civil-law countries, the subtleties of judicial interpretation and the weight of judicial precedents are recognized as involving the courts in significant aspects of lawmaking.

Contributed By:

Walter Probert

In the highly developed civilizations of antiquity, notably those of Assyria and Egypt, judicial and executive functions were undifferentiated and were centralized in the monarch as head of state. Insight into the structure and functions of Babylonian courts of the 18th century BC was obtained when the ancient legal document known as the Code of Hammurabi was discovered early in the 20th century. A highly developed judicial system existed also among the ancient Hebrews.

In the judicial system of ancient Athens, a unique feature, introduced by the lawgiver Solon in the 6th century BC, was the right of aggrieved litigants to appeal the decisions of magistrates to the people of Athens, assembled as a heliaia ("public assembly"). In later years, these assemblies, referred to as heliastic courts, became courts of first resort presided over by magistrates who prepared cases for trial. The heliastic courts subsequently became unwieldy, and they were divided into sections called dicasteries.

The evolution of courts in ancient Rome was marked by the development of a complex structure in which criminal, civil, and other jurisdictions were differentiated and were exercised by separate courts and officials. Violations of criminal law were prosecuted by the state; higher and lower courts were organized; the right of appeal was juridically guaranteed; and a corps of professional jurists was established for the first time in the history of Mediterranean civilization. After Christianity became the state religion of Rome, the ecclesiastical courts, previously established by Christians who had refused to have recourse to pagan courts, became a part of the Roman legal system. As the Roman Empire disintegrated, the ecclesiastical courts survived and assumed jurisdiction over secular affairs.

Western European Tribunals

Medieval courts were an outgrowth of the tribal courts of the Germanic peoples, among whom the highest judicial authority was that of the popular assemblies that met regularly throughout the year. The tribal judges supervised the proceedings and executed the judgments rendered by the assemblies. During the development of the Germanic tribal organization into territorial states, the primitive tribal courts underwent a corresponding evolution, increasing in number and becoming differentiated. Among the new features of this Teutonic system were a royal court, presided over by the king and modeled on the Roman system of courts; special lower courts under the control of royal officials who were called Grafen, which handled minor matters; and, later, a corps of permanent lay judges, with power to render judgments.

In the 8th century, when the Germanic territorial states were part of the realm of Charlemagne, the Teutonic judicial system experienced a further significant development: the practice, initiated by Charlemagne, of dispatching royal commissioners to examine the functioning of local courts and, when necessary, to supplement the justice they dispensed. In this innovation were the seeds of three later important legal developments: assize courts, circuit courts, and a central legal authority. This innovation was adopted by other feudal monarchs in their struggles with the landed nobility, who controlled the manorial, or seignorial, courts.

When the Normans conquered England in 1066, they imposed the Carolingian judicial system on the Anglo-Saxons. In the long struggle between king and landed nobility that ensued, one of the principal weapons of the Crown was the Curia Regis (king's court), which was held wherever the royal household was situated. The principal judicial strongholds of the nobility were the manorial courts, chiefly the courts baron and courts leet. Judicial supremacy eventually was won by the Crown, and, since the reign of King Edward I, in the 13th century, English courts have been organized on a centralized basis.

Before this victory of the Crown, however, King John had been compelled in 1215 to sign the Magna Carta, which initiated the gradual separation of judicial from executive and legislative governmental powers. The terms of this charter of liberty established the Court of Common Pleas as a court of a fixed location to try cases initiated by commoners against other commoners. The process of separation continued during the reign of Edward I with the establishment of the Court of Exchequer as a tribunal having exclusive jurisdiction over revenue cases arising out of unpaid debts to the Crown and the establishment of the Court of King's Bench, or the Court of Queen's Bench, as the supreme appellate tribunal of the realm, presided over by the monarch. The Court of King's, or Queen's, Bench also was invested with original jurisdiction over both civil and criminal cases and thus encroached on the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas. In fact, the jurisdictions of all three courts overlapped and were not entirely differentiiated until much later. These courts later became bulwarks in the defense of civil and political liberties against the Crown.

Another momentous innovation during the reign of Edward I was provision for doing justice in situations in which the common law failed to afford a remedy to aggrieved litigants. This supplemental system of justice was administered by the Crown through the lord chancellor and was called chancery, or equity, jurisprudence.

In the centuries after the signing of the Magna Carta, Parliament acquired appellate jurisdiction over both civil and criminal cases. This function was subsequently confined to the House of Lords and has survived to the present day. In 1701, Parliament enacted legislation establishing tenure of office for judges and made their removal from office conditional on the assent of Parliament, thus completing the separation of judicial from executive and legislative governmental powers. Like many other features of the English judicial system, this separation of powers was incorporated into the courts of the New World.

Later Developments in the British System

Administrative and structural changes in important but secondary features, such as those wrought by the Judicature Act of 1873, have been made. This act, which went into effect in 1875, preserved the role of the House of Lords as the chief appellate tribunal of England and Wales and consolidated all the superior civil courts into a Supreme Court of Judicature with two principal branches: the Court of Appeal, the highest appellate court below the House of Lords, and the High Court of Justice. The latter tribunal comprises three divisions: Chancery Division; King's, or Queen's, Bench Division; and Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division. Enactment of the Criminal Appeal Act of 1907 established the Court of Criminal Appeal as the highest appellate tribunal after the House of Lords in criminal cases. Besides the superior courts, the judicial system of England and Wales includes many lower courts organized into circuits. The highest civil court of Scotland is the Court of Session, and the highest criminal court is the High Court of Justiciary. Appeals may be taken from these courts to the House of Lords.

Other Modern Developments

In France, the development of the judicial system after the breakup of the Carolingian Empire was similar to that in England: Both involved the vesting of central legal authority in the Crown after a protracted struggle with feudal manorial courts. The essential features of the judicial system now in effect in France were established after the French Revolution of 1789 by the Code Napoléon. This system includes lower courts of wide jurisdiction, intermediate courts of appeal, a court to resolve jurisdictional conflicts among courts, and a supreme appellate tribunal called the Court of Cassation. Many European and Latin American judicial systems are modeled on that of France.

Contributed By:

William O. Douglas

Click here to the Homepage of Task II

Click here to back to the "Guide to the Regents Comprehensive Examination of English"