Comparing the Australian Legal System with the Legal System of Your Country of Origin.
Introduction:
The task here is to compare the Australian Legal System with the legal system of the country of origin therefore the comparison is with the Pakistani Legal System. The structure of the Common Wealth Government, Australia briefed in the constitution is divided into three branches, the legislature (Senate “upper house” and House of Representatives “lower house”), executive (the administrative arm of Government) and judiciary (the legal arm of the Government). While in Pakistan the Parliament and Federal Government also consists of Senate the upper house and National assembly the lower house.
‘The ability of the common law to adapt itself to the differing circumstances of the countries in which it has taken root is not a weakness but one of its great strengths. Were it not so the common law would not have flourished as it has, with all the common law countries learning from each other.’
Lord Lloyd, Invercargill City Council v Hamlin [1996] 1 All ER 756 at 764–765
Legal System in comparison - The Australian jurisprudence forms the basis on common law of United Kingdom and similarly the root of Pakistani Legal System stretches from beyond medieval period which passes through Hindu era, Muslim period involving Mughal dynasties, British colonial and the post independence period. When Pakistan was born in August 1947, the Government Act of India 1935 prevailed as a provisional constitution. Thus the judicial and legal British system continued with further modifications and adaptations concluded at ease of the new republic. The Constitution and Shria Law is superior to all other sources and is followed by Legislation which contains Ordinance, delegated legislation and Act constitutes the case law. The Act of Parliament entitles the delegated legislation and equity remains over common law.
The difference in Australian law and Pakistani Law is the introduction of Sharia Law in 1980’s. This is basically an Islamic Law that was incorporated in the
The task here is to compare the Australian Legal System with the legal system of the country of origin therefore the comparison is with the Pakistani Legal System. The structure of the Common Wealth Government, Australia briefed in the constitution is divided into three branches, the legislature (Senate “upper house” and House of Representatives “lower house”), executive (the administrative arm of Government) and judiciary (the legal arm of the Government). While in Pakistan the Parliament and Federal Government also consists of Senate the upper house and National assembly the lower house.
‘The ability of the common law to adapt itself to the differing circumstances of the countries in which it has taken root is not a weakness but one of its great strengths. Were it not so the common law would not have flourished as it has, with all the common law countries learning from each other.’
Lord Lloyd, Invercargill City Council v Hamlin [1996] 1 All ER 756 at 764–765
Legal System in comparison - The Australian jurisprudence forms the basis on common law of United Kingdom and similarly the root of Pakistani Legal System stretches from beyond medieval period which passes through Hindu era, Muslim period involving Mughal dynasties, British colonial and the post independence period. When Pakistan was born in August 1947, the Government Act of India 1935 prevailed as a provisional constitution. Thus the judicial and legal British system continued with further modifications and adaptations concluded at ease of the new republic. The Constitution and Shria Law is superior to all other sources and is followed by Legislation which contains Ordinance, delegated legislation and Act constitutes the case law. The Act of Parliament entitles the delegated legislation and equity remains over common law.
The difference in Australian law and Pakistani Law is the introduction of Sharia Law in 1980’s. This is basically an Islamic Law that was incorporated in the