Scholarlink

In 1934, in an essay that became a classic on the distinction between precedent in Common Law and caselaw in Civil Law, Arthur Goodhart noted that the main difference between the two traditions is precedents were binding for the former while caselaw was persuasive for the latter. In 1961, in a book that was for a long time the main reference on precedents in Common Law, Rupert Cross stated that the search for the ratio decidendi was one of the peculiarities of Anglo-American Law, having no parallel in the Roman-Canonical rooted legal system.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Introduction

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Daniel Mitidiero

摘要

In 1934, in an essay that became a classic on the distinction between precedent in Common Law and caselaw in Civil Law, Arthur Goodhart noted that the main difference between the two traditions is precedents were binding for the former while caselaw was persuasive for the latter. In 1961, in a book that was for a long time the main reference on precedents in Common Law, Rupert Cross stated that the search for the ratio decidendi was one of the peculiarities of Anglo-American Law, having no parallel in the Roman-Canonical rooted legal system.