Regarding appeals, the appellate court will take de novo review of both facts and the law of the case in civil law. The court again revises the testimony, collect the new evidence and resort to the expert opinion. Here the appellate court may reverse, modify and remand lower court decision as per the circumstances and will delivers judgment itself. But in common law the appellate court only considers the question of law not the case. Sometimes the court remands the case to the third lower court to deliver the judgment. (16)
From the above discussion it can be inferred that the way of treating the law in the civil law is different from that of the context of common law jurisdiction. But in recent years the civil law and the common law adopts many legal perspectives from each other. Some critics pointed that these “transactions of law” may hinder the history, nation’s socio political values and cultures. In recent laws in common law jurisdiction aims to confer primary authority and responsibility on the judge to give the directions ibid 1 regarding the proceedings in various civil disputes, at the same time the German law already began to implement the role of advocates.
This shows that by changing the attitudes towards the most crucial approach, i. e adversial and non adversial approach, both common law and civil law trying to capture other perspectives of legal systems. Conclusion Apart from the adoption of significant part of the legal system of other jurisdiction, the main benefit of the comparative study is that one can enter in to the depth of the one’s own legal system as well as the legal sphere of other jurisdiction also.
But the here the important aspects is that the basic elements which should be complied by these legal systems are similar in nature. The law system whether it is civil law or it is of common law, must follow the elements like, competent and definite judgment, right to counsel, fair notice and hearing, exchange of evidence in order to reach the finality of the proceedings. Bibliography1. Benjamin Kaplan, Arthur T. Von Mehran , Rudolf Schaefer, Phases of German Civil Procedure, Harvard Law Review , Vol . 71, No.
7 ,1958, publ. The Harvard law review association 2. Cappelletti, The Judicial Process in Comparative Perspective, Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press, 1989. 3. Glendon, M. and Gordon, M. Comparative Legal Traditions: Text, Materials, and Cases on the Civil Law, Common Law, and Socialist Law Traditions with Special Reference to French, West German, English, and Soviet Law. 2nd edition, St. Paul: West, 1994. 4. Jean Louis Bergel, principle features and methods of codifications, Louisiana Law Review,. vol. 48 May 1988