Considering the legal systems of our time inWithin the framework of one of the legal disciplines, first of all the authors of textbooks, teachers, practitioners have in mind, of course, systems that take place to be at any point in our world. Those. not only the features of the legal system of Russia, but systems in individual countries of the Earth are considered.
For today it is possible to allocate two in anyleast competing system. They were the most effective, acceptable and widespread: Romano-Germanic and Anglo-Saxon. Sometimes socialism is called along with them, but many historians argue that such a social system is a transitional stage from one system to another.
The legal systems of our time have their owncons, and its pluses. Sometimes the former outweigh the last. And the same system in different countries can develop in different ways: with respect to some elements of the system faster, while others are slower.
Each system includes asseparate elements, not only acts, ways of law enforcement, but also the citizens' self-awareness. The similarity of individual elements among themselves just allows us to attribute a certain system to a "legal family".
Of course, modern legal systems have their own national and historically developed features. This can be seen even by the name of the main legal "families".
Continental System
Russian legislation is classified as a "family"Romano-Germanic or continental (as it is still called) system. They share the same legal basis of the countries of Europe, Japan, Latin America and China (in part). The main feature of this system is the recognition of unshakable human rights (the Constitution) and the allocation of obligations of a citizen to his country. It is based on the Roman postulates of rights, well-developed in universities in Europe. The rule of law is established through a number of codes, but the Constitution has a greater legal force. It is on its basis that all the laws in the country are built and changed, since it contains the rights of the citizen as the supreme value of the state. A similar constitution exists in other countries with a continental legal system (for example, the Declaration of Rights in the European Union).
The second trait of the "family" is the division of the socialand private (introduced the concept of municipal and private property). It's no secret that there are situations when the public and the interests of an individual are closely intertwined. And often the law can be interpreted as in favor of society, and in favor of the citizen. But the judicial system allows you to disassemble, resolve each case, and, if necessary, make changes to the RF codes: general (such as civil) and special (housing, family and others).
Undoubtedly, the legal systems of the world were being improved: there were laws on intellectual property and others, which were not originally.
The Anglo-Saxon system
Another common system isAnglo-Saxon: the United States and the British Commonwealth (Great Britain, distinguished from other European countries, Canada, New Zealand, Nigeria, Australia and others). The system was based on the federal system of colonies: centralization of power. Changing, the Anglo-Saxon system absorbed the main concept - justice. To act in accordance with conscience - such a principle, it would seem, could solve the main problem of the continental system - the dissatisfaction of the parties due to the divergence in the interpretation of the law. The principle continues to this day: when the law is impotent, fair (again from the subjective point of view of the court) measures are applied. True, only with respect to private property, contractual relations, judicial penalties. And only on the basis of general legal standards.
The notion of private in the Anglo-Saxon systemmuch wider, hence there are fewer differences between citizens. For example, the rights of both companies and individuals are treated in private (the principle of fairness is "evident").
Thus, the historically established basic legalthe systems of modernity differ in the ways of satisfying the basic human rights. And as far as justice is able to achieve this goal - it is difficult to judge, living only on one system, without experiencing the effect of the other.
In conclusion, it should be noted that legalmodern systems can have a different kind: as more specific "narrow" forms (Muslim law, Jewish and others), and internationally (as an example, you can take the European Union and its Declaration of Human Rights).
