Differences between Civil and Criminal Laws - Essay Example

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LAWS Civil and Criminal Laws: Their Difference and the Extent to Which Both Systems Overlap. Arun Babu Academia Research Introduction Criminal law is much better known to laymen than civil law, as a result of journalists' reports of famous criminal trials. In talking with people about law, I find that they often misapply principles from criminal law to situations in civil (e.g., tort) law, which results in their misunderstanding. They are surprised when they learn the actual legal principles that apply to a problem. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast criminal and civil law. In civil law, a private party (e.g., a corporation or individual person) files the lawsuit and becomes the plaintiff. In criminal law, the litigation is always filed by the government, who is called the prosecution. Difference between Civil and Criminal Law Criminal Law Criminal law distinguishes crimes from civil wrongs such as tort breach of contract. Criminal law has been seen as a system of regulating the behavior of individuals and groups in relation to societal norms whereas civil law is aimed primarily at the relationship between private individuals and their rights and obligations under the law. Although many ancient legal systems did not clearly define a distinction between criminal and civil law, in England there was little difference until the codification of criminal law occurred in the late nineteenth century. In most U.S. law schools, the basic course in criminal law is based upon the English common criminal law of 1750 (with some minor American modifications like the clarification of mens rea in the Model Penal Code). In civil cases, the Seventh Amendment guarantees a defendant a right to a jury trial in federal court, but that right does not apply to the states (in contrast with criminal cases). Civil Law Legal system derived from the Roman Corpus Juris Civilus of Emperor Justinian I; differs from a common-law system, which relies on prior decisions to determine the outcome of a lawsuit. Most European and South American countries have a civil law system. England and most of the countries it dominated or colonized, including Canada and the United States, have a common-law system. However, within these countries, Louisiana, Quebec, and Puerto Rico exhibit the influence of French and Spanish settlers in their use of civil law systems. A body of rules that delineate private rights and remedies and govern disputes between individuals in such areas as contracts, property, and family law is distinct from criminal or public law. Punishment One of the most fundamental distinctions between civil and criminal law is in the notion of punishment. Criminal Law In criminal law, a guilty defendant is punished by either (1) incarceration in a jail or prison, (2) fine paid to the government, or, in exceptional cases, (3) execution of the defendant: the death penalty. Crimes are divided into two broad classes: felonies have a maximum possible sentence of more than one year incarceration; misdemeanors have a maximum possible sentence of less than one year incarceration. Civil Law In contrast, a defendant in civil litigation is never incarcerated and never executed. In general, a losing defendant in civil litigation only reimburses the plaintiff for losses caused by the defendant's behavior. So-called punitive damages are never awarded in a civil case under contract law. In a civil case under tort law, there is a possibility of punitive damages, if the defendant's conduct is egregious and had either (1)amalicious intent (i.e., desire to cause harm), (2)grossnegligence (i.e., conscious indifference), or (3)awillful disregard for the rights of others. The use of punitive damages makes a public example of the defendant and supposedly deters future wrongful conduct by others. Punitive damages are particularly important in torts involving dignitary harms (e.g., invasion of privacy) and civil rights, where the actual monetary injury to plaintiff(s) may be small. One can purchase insurance that will pay damages and attorney's fees for tort claims. Such insurance coverage is a standard part of homeowner's insurance policies, automobile insurance, and insurance for businesses. In contrast, it is not possible for a defendant to purchase insurance to pay for his/her criminal acts. While a court can order a defendant to pay damages, the plaintiff may receive nothing if the defendant has noassets and noinsurance, or if the defendant is skillful in concealing assets. In this way, large awards for plaintiffs in tort cases are often an illusion. Effect of Punishment The notion that the threat of punishment will deter criminal conduct is based on the principle that human beings are rational. In practice, criminals are either impulsive (i.e., not rational) or believe that they will not be caught by the police. Therefore, the threat of punishment does not deter criminal conduct, as one is reminded every day by reading reports of journalists. Legal theory considers the possibility of loss of freedom (i.e., incarceration) as much more serious than merely paying damages to an injured plaintiff. As a result of this high value placed on personal freedom, legal dogma is that criminal litigation is more serious than civil litigation, therefore criminal defendants have more rights and protections than civil defendants, as explained later in this essay. The economic reality is that most people would prefer to spend, for example, one year in prison, than pay a million dollars from their personal assets. Burden Of Proof Criminal Law In criminal litigation, the burden of proof is always on the state. The state must prove that the defendant is guilty. The defendant is assumed to be innocent; the defendant needs to prove nothing. (There are exceptions. If the defendant wishes to claim that he/she is insane, and therefore notguilty, the defendant bears the burden of proving his/her insanity. Other exceptions include defendants who claim self-defense or duress.) In criminal litigation, the state must prove that the defendant satisfied each element of the statutory definition of the crime, and the defendant's participation, "beyond a reasonable doubt." It is difficult to put a valid numerical value on the probability that a guilty person really committed the crime, but legal authorities who do assign a numerical value generally say "at least 98% or 99%" certainty of guilt. Civil Law In civil litigation, the burden of proof is initially on the plaintiff. However, there are a number of technical situations in which the burden shifts to the defendant. For example, when the plaintiff has made a primafacie case, the burden shifts to the defendant to refute or rebut the plaintiff's evidence. In civil litigation, the plaintiff wins if the preponderance of the evidence favors the plaintiff. For example, if the jury believes that there is more than a 50% probability that the defendant was negligent in causing the plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff wins. This is a very low standard, compared to criminal law. In my personal view, it is too low a standard, especially considering that the defendant could be ordered to pay millions of dollars to the plaintiff(s). A few tort claims (e.g., fraud) require that plaintiff prove his/her case at a level of "clear and convincing evidence", which is a standard higher than preponderance, but less than "beyond a reasonable doubt. How Civil and Criminal Law Overlap One way of looking at criminal law is that it is dealing with something of public interest. For example, the public has an interest in seeing that people are protected from being robbed or assaulted. These are legal problems that fall into the criminal law. Criminal law involves punishing and rehabilitating offenders, and protecting society. Since the public has an interest in having criminal law, we give the government the power to put it in place and enforce it. The police and Prosecutors are hired by the government to put the criminal law into effect. Public funds are used to pay for these services. If you are the victim of a crime, you report it to the police and they have the responsibility to investigate. They arrest and charge the suspect. In most cases, if a charge has been properly laid and if there is evidence supporting it, the Prosecutor, not the person who complains of the incident, prosecutes it in the courts. This is called a system of public prosecutions. Long ago the person who had been wronged prosecuted the case. The power to prosecute privately remains, but is used rarely now. Even if a person starts a prosecution privately, the Attorney General has the power to take over the prosecution of the case. As a victim, you do not have to be responsible for enforcing the law. The police and Prosecutor do their jobs for the public at large, not for you personally. In a criminal case, the prosecutor must prove the defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." This means that at the end of a trial the judge or jury can only find the defendant guilty if they are left without a reasonable doubt about the defendant's guilt. In other words, there is no logical or rational reason to doubt the defendant's guilt. This is not the case in civil law. Civil law is about private disputes between individuals or between individuals and organizations. Civil matters include areas such as contract law, family law, tort law, property law and labor law. The person suing for a wrong has the burden of proving their case on a "balance of probabilities." This means that a judge or jury must believe their story and evidence more than the defendant's version. They do not need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil disputes usually involve some harm, loss or injury to one party or their property. Unlike criminal law; however, civil law is primarily involved with compensating victims. If a civil action is successful, the defendant will be responsible for the wrongful action. While a defendant in a criminal case may be found "guilty" or "not guilty," a defendant in a civil case is said to be "liable" or "not liable" for damages. If you have a civil law problem, you have to take action yourself if you want to get a legal remedy. You can hire a private lawyer, and you will have to pay the expenses of pursuing the matter. For example, if you hire someone to paint your house and they do a poor job, it is a dispute between you and the painter. The police do not get involved. If you want to sue the painter for breach of contract, it is your responsibility to do so. Sometimes criminal law is referred to as part of our public law because it applies to all regulates relationships within the society. Similarly, civil law is sometimes referred to as private law because it regulates private relationships between individuals in our society. References http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm Copyright 1998 by Ronald B. Standler (revised 19 Oct 2002) Avatar Singh M.A, L.L.B, Law of Crime. Bhatia C P C, M.A, L.L.B, Civil Law. Read More