Briefly describe some of the differences between the legal environment of a country that embraces common law and one that observes civil law? Answer:
Countries that embrace common law system are typically those that were former British colonies or protectorates, including the United States, Australia, Singapore, Pakistan, India and Ghana. Common law is the legal tradition, which evolved in England from the 11th Century onwards. In common law there is not always a written constitution or codified laws. Judges follow the precedents in their decision is based on similar previous cases. Common law is flexible thus, the rules and regulations vary from case to case. If a new case rises the judge will make a new la and apply it for the present case. Generally, everything is permitted that is not expressly prohibited by law. (Siac & Cecilia 2002). On the other civil law is inspired by the Roman law which was modeled on the groundbreaking French Code Civil from 1804 (Code Napoleon) (Mulbacher et. al 2006). The main feature of civil law is that it is generally written constitution based on specific codes such as civil code, codes covering corporate law, tax law and constitutional law. Civil law is allowing easy accessibility to all citizens to its code of conduct which is well written. Judges have to follow the written word thus, it is less flexible.
“See you in court” is one way to respond when legal issues arise. Why can that approach backfire when the issue concerns global marketing? Answer:
When dealing with global marketing, litigation and lawsuits between companies can backfire and have negative effects. There is no international law in a formal sense, and no agreed laws that can always be applied to international business relations and every country has its own law (Cueto 2010). International businesses in foreign countries are affected by the role of lawyer who might be very costly, corrupted or biased to local firms. In some...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document