Differences Between Criminal Cases and Civil Cases | A Level Notes Law 9084

There are several distinctions in criminal proceedings and criminal proceedings

The cases take place in different courts.

• In general, criminal cases are heard either in the Magistrate's Court or the Crown Court, whereas civil cases will be tried in the High court or the county court. (Keep in mind that some civil issues can be handled within the Magistrates' Court, particularly family cases)

• The person starting the case is given a different name.

The ones bringing in the cases are known as the prosecutor in criminal cases; however, in civil cases, they are known as the claimant and previously known as the plaintiff (pre-1999).

As already mentioned, the criminal case is brought on behalf of the state, and the Crown Prosecution Service is liable for prosecuting prosecutions, although other state agencies that investigate other types of crime, such as the Environment Agency or Customs and Excise.

The individual (or business) making a claim initiates civil cases.

• The terminology used is different.

A defendant is proven guilty or not guilty in a criminal case (an alternate way to put it is to claim that the defendant is accused or acquitted), while a defendant is determined to be innocent or not responsible in a civil case.

Those deemed guilty of a crime may be convicted at the conclusion of a criminal case, although anyone found responsible at the end of a civil case will be required to remedy the matter as far as practicable.

This is usually done by granting payment in cash, known as damages, although the judge can impose certain decisions such as an injunction to avoid similar actions in the future or a specific performance order where the person who violated a deal is required to finish the contract.

• The standard of proof is different.

It is necessary to prove criminal cases' without reasonable doubt.' This is a very strong standard of evidence and is important as a prosecution might result in a criminal receiving a long jail sentence.

Civil cases need only be proved' on the chance basis,' a lesser requirement where the judge decides who is most likely to be right.

This key distinction in the criterion to which a case must be proved means that although a plaintiff has been acquitted in a criminal case, a civil case against such a defendant based on the same facts can still be successful. Cases like these are rare.

Certain circumstances where civil action can be accompanied by a strong criminal case include instances involving road accidents. A person may be charged and convicted of a driving crime, such as passing a red traffic light or driving without due care and consideration; this is a criminal case.

Anyone who was harmed as a result of the accident or who had lost property may file a civil action and recover damages. The reality that the suspect was guilty of a traffic crime would make the civil case harder to prove

Distinguishing Between Civil and Criminal Law

• Realizing that civil law is very distinct from criminal law is essential. Criminal law is a branch of public law. However, civil law falls In the distinct branch of private law. Crime is seen as a crime against the state and society as a whole because criminal law is part of public legislation.

• Civil law is referred to as private law because the things it deals with are between two persons. All forms of legislation have different purposes and are dealt with in various courts.

Definition of 'Law'

• We have only tackled those areas of law so far and have followed the structure that remains in England and Wales for a short time. It is now important to explore more broadly what is implied by law in general and to equate it with principles of morality and justice.

• Giving a concise one-sentence description of law is not possible–indeed, such a concept has been sought by legal theorists. In the early 19th century, John Austin described the law as an order given from a superior (state) to an inferior (individual) and imposed by penalties.

• Nonetheless, this definition does not really extend to regulatory laws such as setting out how a will must be made; nor does it include the principle of judicial scrutiny, where individuals can contest a state minister's "order." At a period when the law was much less advanced than it is now, Austin wrote, so it is not shocking that his interpretation does not include all forms of law today.

• Sir John Salmond described the law as' the set of values that the state recognizes and extends to the administration of justice.'

This is a much broader definition than that of Austin and is probably the most interesting and closer one to achieving a workable description of' single-sentence.'
#Law9084 #CriminalCases #CivilCases ‪@Notesreel‬