Question

1. 4 points -Describe the key differences between feudal, canon, and royal jurisprudence -e.g. laws, court culture and procedure, the underlying interests represented, etc. (4 to % a page, single spaced)

Answer 1

Difference between feudal canon and royal jurisprudence

Feudal jurisprudence: The feudal laws were earlier unwritten and it was based on custom. It was later written and became important part of European legal system. The feudal laws were a division in the Royal courts and hundred courts in thirteenth-century. The courts were in the jurisdiction of feudal lords. The purpose of defense, police, justice, tax collection and administration were performed by Lords. They collected revenues through it. The king classified the courts as high and low justice. The former was mobile, met three times annually to solve cases. Feudal jurisprudence utilizes concepts such as juries and single judges.

The law provided security to households as it governed the relationships of people and land. It also regulated the relations of lord and vassal. The laws were used by Kings and vassals for controlling the public. The laws covered succession, inheritance, and possession concerning the land.

Canon (Roman) jurisprudence: It introduced justice and equity in law system beyond law of the state. In this collegiate panels of judges decided the cases through investigations and proceedings. Canonical jurisprudence espoused Roman church authority. It acknowledged the jurisdictional power of the Roman bishop. The laws were secular.

Royal jurisprudence: The Royal courts are in London. It is only related with civil cases. The area witnesses sessions of the Court of Appeal, the High Court of Justice, and the Crown Court.

Royal jurisprudence is also an independent and privately institution in Madrid that is advocated by renowned global jurists for promoting discussion, spreading knowledge, and promoting investigation in legal area.