LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

prof s c pratihar (medical practitioner &legal studies)     29 September 2008

disadvantages of law

fixed rules  of law have disadvantages too.they are rigidity, conservatism, formalism,undueneedless complexity.more to be described by sr members for students. 


 7 Replies

Adv.Shine Thomas (Advocate)     29 September 2008

  • bulk and complexity

  • slowness of growth

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     29 September 2008

But Common law countries also have deficient in the following three aspects 1. remedy are not available in all cases and many wrongs remained unreadressed for want of proper writs. 2. The relief granted by thecommon law courts was not always adequate. 3. The procedure in the common law courts was defective and unsatisfactory.

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     29 September 2008

I am glad this issue has come up and hope other also share their views. Please comments all of you.

Shree. ( Advocate.)     29 September 2008

Dear DR,

    Difficulties can arise in deciding what the ratio decidendi is, particularly if there are a number of reasons.

* There may be a considerable wait for a case to come to court for a point to be decided.

* Cases can easily be distinguished on their facts to avoid following an inconvenient precedent.

* There is far too much case law and it is too complex.


Shree. ( Advocate.)     29 September 2008

Dear Sir,

Rigidity - The system is too rigid and does not allow the law to develop enough.

Injustice - The strict rules of judicial precedent can create injustice in individual cases

Slow Development - The law is slow to develop under the system of judicial precedent.  The law cannot be changed until a case on a particular point of law comes before one of the higher appellate courts.

Confusion - Hundreds of cases are reported each year, making it hard to find the relevant precedent which should be followed.

Complexity - The law is too complex with thousands of fine distinctions.

K.C.Suresh (Advocate)     30 September 2008

Interpretation of law is the answer. There may be rigid, unjustified, slow developed, confused and complexed as Shree said. But this can be interpreted in several angle without destroying the intention of the legislature. Law of the land included pronounced law also. So our system is flexible, smooth and fair to enough to do justice to majority. There may be personal error from enforcing agency, investigating folks and judicial pervertism. That is excusable comparing with the other third world countries and big horned nations. We have a law rigid but flexible by the courts.

It is not correct to call our system with conservatism, formalism,undueneedless and complexity. Every aspect of law can be interpreted in its proper perspective by a good judge. By a good lawyer. Bya good investigator and prosecutor, by a good civil form. We are fortunate enough to be born in a country with at least a law of the people.  

prabodh kumar patel (advocate)     26 October 2008

 a good discussion


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register