A COMPARISON OF THE COMMON LAW BASED DUTY WITH ITS CIVIL LAW EQUIVALENT

The article discusses the features of civil law in different countries. The authors studied the origins of the modern tradition of civil law, comparing the legal systems of two European countries. One of the traditional classifications of duties in civil law is analyzed, the conclusion is made about the inappropriateness of the allocation of personal and universal duties. In comparative law, there are many situations where the same legal term has different meanings, or where different legal terms have same legal effect. This confusion most often occurs when civil lawyers have to deal with common law, or vice versa, when common law lawyers deal with civil law issues. While there are many issues which are dealt with in the same way by the civil law and common law systems, there remain also significant differences between these two legal systems related to legal structure, classification, fundamental concepts, terminology, etc. As lawyers know, legal systems in countries around the world generally fall into one of two main categories: common law systems and civil law systems. There are roughly 150 countries that have what can be described as primarily civil law systems, whereas there are about 80 common law countries. The main difference between the two systems is that in common law countries, case law - in the form of published judicial opinions - is of primary importance, whereas in civil law systems, codified statutes predominate.

1. Vischer B. ‘The Fiduciary in Continental Europe’ [1999] Trust & Trustees 13, 14

2. Frankel T. ‘Towards Universal Fiduciary Principles’ (2014) 39 Queen’s Law Journal 391, 401-404

3. MatteiU.‘Basic Issues of Private Law Codification in Europe: Trust’ (2001) 1 Global Jurist Frontiers 1, 2

4. MaumeP. ‘Conflict of interest and disclosure under company law: a continental-European perspective on legal origins’ (2016) Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 16:1, 69-99, 74-76 at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14735970.2015.1101306 (last visited 19 June 2016)

5. Fleischer H. ‘Legal Transplants in European Company Law: the Case of Fiduciary Duties’ (2005) 2 European Company Law and Financial Law Review 378, 382 and also C. Gerner-Beuerle and E.P. Schuster, ‘The Evolving Structure of Director’s Duties in Europe’ (2014) E.B.O.R., 15(2), 191-233, 206

6. Bebchuk L.A. and Roe M.J. ‘A Theory of Path Dependence in Corporate Ownership and Governance’ (1999) 52 Stanford Law Journal 127-170, 154 quoted in P. Maume, n 108 above, 77

7. Drucker A. ‘Trusts on the Continental Europe’ (1955) 4 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 550, 551 and also see P. Maume, n 108 above, 77

8. It can be found under German law and known as “fiduziarische Treuhand”

9. Maume P. n 108 above, 78-80 and also see M. Vranken, Fundamentals of European Civil Law (Federation Press, 2nd ed., 2010), 23

10. Gerner C.Beuerle and E.P. Schuster, n 110 above, 206

11. Kokch J. ‘Begriff und Rechtsfolgen von Interessenkonflikten und Unabhängigkeit im Aktienrecht’ (2014) 43 Zeitschrift für Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht 697, 700 cited in P. Maume, n 108 above, 91

12. Federal Court of Justice, 21 December 1979, File No II ZR 244/78 and also see ibid, 92

13. Gerner C.Beuerle and Schuster E.P. n 110 above, 209

14. Vranken M. Fundamentals of European Civil Law (Federation Press, 2nd ed., 2010, 57-61)