[MUSIC]

Okay, so I want to talk about two main themes.

First of all, I want to examine the hierarchy of the

courts, with relation to the kind of work that each court does.

And I want to make a distinction between trial courts and appellate courts as well.

The second main theme that I wanted to look at in relation to the

hierarchy of the courts, is the centrality

of the hierarchy to the Doctrine of Precedence.

So the first thing I want to talk about

relates to the kind of work that the courts do.

But also, to an important distinction between the appellate Courts, the courts

that hear appeals, and the trial Courts, the courts of first instance.

What's we're actually talking about when we talk about the

work of the courts, is not necessarily about a hierarchical relationship.

What it's really about is a division of labor.

In other words, a division of labor

between the civil Courts and the criminal Courts.

I think it fair to say, that this division

of labor is justified by a kind of specialization.

In other words, it stream lines, it

makes the system, the legal system operate better,

if civil courts deal primarily with civil matters,

and criminal courts deal primarily with criminal matters.

What we'll find when we look at this themes in detail in

a moment, is that none of these distinctions are hard and fast.

In other words, what we will find, when we look at the various courts is

that courts can have both appellate and a

trial jurisdiction, and also civil and criminal jurisdiction.

Which obviously is a little bit confusing.

And I'm sorry about that, it's just the way things are.

I think if you sat down and tried to

define, or create a system of courts, from logical

first principles, you probably wouldn't end up with the

system of courts that we have in the United Kingdom.

This is in part I think it reflects the history.

It reflects the fact that institutions of common law are historical.

They change over time.

Change is often quite messy.

So, I want to return to my first point which is, I suppose the point I

advertised about the division of labor, the distinction

between the civil courts and the criminal courts.

So I'm thinking, first of all, about civil courts and

I'm thinking about the distinction between civil courts and criminal courts.

So, civil court cases arise when an individual

or a business believes their rights have been infringed.

Civil justice in England and Wales is mainly dealt with in the county

courts, and in the case of more

substantial or complex cases the High court.

The jurisdiction, this is a technical word which relates

to the kind of case that a court can hear.

Jurisdiction then at the civil courts covers

a very wide range, from quite small or

simple claims for example, damaged goods, or recovery

of debt, to large claims between multinational corporations.

Civil cases involve hearings in open court, which the public may attend.

Hearings in the Judge's private rooms from which the public are excluded.

And matters decided by the Judge, in private, and on the basis of papers alone.

In other words, without representation being

made orally by lawyers or representatives.

Courts in the civil jurisdiction don't have the power to imprison a losing party

ordinarily, but not always, they award financial damages to the successful party.

The size of which depends on the circumstances of the claim.

The litigation, the matters that courts deal

with is structured in a particular way.

And that's true of civil courts, and that's true of criminal courts.

The theme I want to return to, because it's what I want

to talk about for the moment, is criminal courts, and criminal cases.

So we can get our heads around this basic distinction between the kind

of work civil courts do, and the kind of work that criminal courts do.

So here's a statement about criminal courts.

Criminal cases come to court after a decision has been made, usually

by the crown prosecution service, to prosecute somebody for an alleged crime.

In the vast majority of cases, magistrates in the magistrates' court hear

the evidence and, as a panel, make a decision on guilt or innocence.

For more serious cases, district judge in the magistrates' court

or a circuit judge in the Crown Court will hear evidence.

In the case of the latter, this will involve a jury trial.

Very serious criminal cases, such as murder or rape, may

be heard by a high court judge in the high court.

Although we're making a distinction between civil

and criminal courts, we have to observe

in detail that certain civil courts have

jurisdiction over certain criminal cases and vice versa.

We also need to study the fact that in

relation to trial courts and appellate courts, in other words,

courts that are trying cases and courts that are hearing

appeals, the picture is also somewhat muddy, logical but muddy.

To the extent that the courts that we're looking at,

have both trial jurisdiction, in other words, they try cases.

And a appellate jurisdiction, in other words, they hear appeals on cases.

And with this basic tool kit of ideas then, I want to look in more

detail at the machinery of both the civil and the criminal courts.

An Introduction to the courts

English Common Law: Structure and Principles

Conoce a los instructores