LIBON, Ritchelle V.

JD1
Legal systems can be classified into two categories: the Civil law and the
Common law. Common Law system can be traced back to English monarchy. This
system is well known through the usage of formal orders called writs when justice is
needed to be done. If in a situation writs were not sufficient, courts of equity were
basically established in order to provide remedies to hear complaints based on equitable
principles taken from sources of authority such as natural law. Common laws has no
comprehensive compilations of legal rules and statutes. While they do rely on
precedents, these are maintained over time through the record of the courts and case
laws (such as yearbooks and reports) documented in in collections.
On the other hand, Civil Law is the codified type of legal system which can be
traced back to the code of laws compiled by the Roman Emperor Justinian. This system
has comprehensive, continuously updated specified legal codes that may be brought
before a competent court of jurisdiction with applicable procedure and the appropriate
punishment. Its historical origin can be found in the compilation of Roman Laws. 1
The Philippine legal system can be characterized by a mixed of both Civil and
Common law in such a way that our Civil law jurisdictions often have a statute law that
is heavily influenced by the common law. With respect to the development of our legal
system, Spain has imposed to us the Civil law system as represented by the Code
Napoleon. Subsequently, United States took over us and imposed the common law
system on public law.2 For that reason, Philippines is a hybrid of legal system until the
present day.
The confluence of the two legal systems has given ours elasticity and progressiveness
because ideally, it is better to cope with the weaknesses inherent in, and be able to draw
from the strengths offered by, both Civil law and Common law systems. Both systems
have philosophical mechanisms to promote certain important but contending and often
conflicting aims; predictability by the doctrine of stare decisis, and flexibility and
growth by the rules of equity and the techniques for limiting and distinguishing
precedent in the Common law system. Whereas, in the code system of Civil law, while
flexibility and growth are permitted, internally, by general clauses tempering rigid rules,
and externally by interpretation, made more apparent by the absence of a formal rule of
stare decisis.
A major difference between Civil law and Common law is that priority in Civil
law is given to doctrine over jurisprudence, while the opposite is true in the common
law. An example would be the adoption of the theory of separation of powers by
Montesquie whereby the function of legislator is to legislate and the function of the
court is to apply the law. In common law, precedents promulgated by judges is found to
be the core of the law. Civil law focuses on legal principles with the purpose of tracing
1https://www.law.berkeley.edu/library/robbins/CommonLawCivilLawTraditions.html
2 Koppel, A., Mattar, M.,& Palmer, Vernon. Mixed Legal Systems: East and West (January 2015)

its history, development, functions as well as its applications in a situation. Whereas,

Common Law is focused basically on pattern. As Civil law applies general principles,
Common law applies specific rules to specific facts and provides principal sources of
law. With respect to the style of jurisprudence, Civil law judgements are formalistic as
compared to Common law type of legal system. Civil law statutes provides no
definitions, and state principles in broad and general while common law statues provide
specific rules including lengthy applications as well as exceptions. Common laws are
precise because it is aimed at restricting rules they intended to cover. Method of writing
is also different. Common law judgments extensively expose the facts compare or
distinguish them from the facts of previous cases and decide what specific legal rule to
apply on the present query, as what have been discussed earlier. Civil law is focused
generally on principles relevant, then verify the applicability of such to the facts
presented.Consequentially,Civil law system is limited in a sense that every possible
situation is governed by limited number of general principles, while Common law
system is more embracing and open in the sense that new rule may be created or
imported for new facts. Therefore, Civil law allows wider rules compared to common
law. As to category of laws, Civil laws are based on rules themselves while Common
law were founded on the on the law that was administered by different courts such as
common law courts and courts of equity.3
Some areas wherein Civil law functions are in Property, Contract, Criminal law, Family
relations and Succession. Meanwhile, Common law is evident in areas such as as
Corporation law, Constitutional law, Procedure, Taxation, Insurance, Labor relations,
Negotiable instruments, Banking and Currency.4 As may be observed with the kind of
legal system that we have at present, although Philippines have mixed legal system, it
has a civil law tradition precisely because it could be classified as a predominantly civil
law country.

____________________
Ritchelle V. Libon

3 Tetley, W., Mixed Jurisdictions: Common Law vs Civil Law (Codified and Uncodified), pp. 591-618
4http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/international-law/regionalisation-is-evident-in-thephilippines-in-different-manners-international-law-essay.php