COURT SYSTEM IN INDIA, UNITED STATES AND UNITED

KINGDOM: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

SUBMITTED TO:
Mr.Aashutosh kumar Aahire
Faculty, Political Science, H.N.L.U., Atal Nagar

SUBMITTED BY:
Surbhi Bais
Roll No.-175, Section C
Semester 4th B.A. LL.B (Hons.)

SUBMITTED ON:
AUGUST 26th,2013

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, UPARWARA, ATAL

NAGAR, CHHATTISGARH
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this project work titled “Court System in India, United States and United Kingdom: A
Comparative Study” is my own work and represents my own ideas, and where others’ ideas or words have
been included, I have adequately cited and referenced the original sources. I also declare that I have adhered
to all principles of academic honesty and integrity and have not misrepresented or fabricated or falsified any
idea/data/fact/source in my submission.

Surbhi Bais
Roll no-175, Section C
B.A. LLB., 4th semester

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The practical realization of this project has obligated the assistance of many persons. I express my deepest
regard and gratitude for Mr Aashutosh Kumar Aahire Her consistent supervision, constant inspiration and
invaluable guidance have been of immense help in understanding and carrying out the nuances of the project
report.

I would like to thank my family and friends without whose support and encouragement, this project would not
have been a reality.

I take this opportunity to also thank the University and the Vice Chancellor for providing extensive database
resources in the Library and through Internet. I would be grateful to receive comments and suggestions to
further improve this project report.
I feel highly elated to work on the topic “Court System in India, US and UK: A Comparative Study”.

Surbhi Bais
Semester 1
Section- C, Roll no.-175

2|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
 Declaration……………………………………………………………………………….1
 Acknowledgement………………………………………………………………………..2
 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………4
 Chapterisation at a glance………………………………………………………………...5
 Objectives………………………………………………………………………………...6
 Research Methodology…………………………………………………………………...7
 Scope of work……….…………………………………………………………………....7
 Mode of citation…………………………………………………………………………..7
 Chapter I: Court System of India…………………………………………………………8
 Chapter II: Court System of the United States…..……………………………………….13
 Chapter III: Court System of United Kingdom…………………………………………..17
 Chapter IV Comparison between court systems of India, US and UK…………………..21
 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………..25
 Refrence…………………………………………………………………………………..26

3|Page
 INTRODUCTION
Judiciary (also known as the judicial system or court system) is the system of courts that interprets and applies
the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also known as the mechanism for the resolution of disputes.
Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make statutory law(which is
the responsibility of the legislature) or enforce law (which is the responsibility of the executive), but rather
interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case. However, the judiciary does make common law, setting
precedent for other courts to follow. This branch of the state is often tasked with ensuring equal justice under
law. Judicial System or the court system is also Judiciary System. The court has the power to make decisions and
also enforce the law, solve disputes. Judiciary system consists of Judges and other magistrates, they form the
bench or the core of the judiciary system.

On 26 January 1950, the Indian Constitution was written and it is worlds largest constitution written. The
constitution is the source of law in India and also the supreme law of India. Judicial System of India consists of
Supreme Court, High Court, District Court or Subordinate Court.

United States Supreme Court justices are appointed by the President of the United States and approved by
the United States Senate. The Supreme Court justices serve for a life term or until retirement. The Supreme
Court is located in Washington, D.C. The United States federal court system consists of 94 federal judicial
districts. The 94 districts are then divided into twelve regional circuits. The United States has five different
types of courts that are considered subordinate to the Supreme Court: United States bankruptcy courts, United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, United States Court of International Trade, United States
courts of appeals, and United States district courts.

In United Kingdom, different types of case are dealt with in specific courts: for example, all criminal cases
will start in the magistrates’ court, but the more serious criminal matters are committed (or sent) to the Crown
Court. Appeals from the Crown Court will go to the High Court, and potentially to the Court of Appeal or
even the Supreme Court.

Civil cases will sometimes be dealt with by magistrates, but may well go to a county court. Again, appeals
will go to the High Court and then to the Court of Appeal – although to different divisions of those courts.

Thus, this project discusses about the judicial system of India, United States and United Kingdom in detail and
draws a comparison between them.

4|Page
 Chapterisation at a Glance
In the first chapter, the author talks about the functioning of court system of India. Its talks about the Supreme
Court, the High court and about the District courts. It talks about the working of court system in India.

In the second chapter, the author talks about the functioning of court system of the United States. It talks about
three main levels: district courts (the trial courts), circuit courts which are the first level of appeal and the
Supreme Court of the United States.

In the third chapter, the author talks about the functioning of court system of court system of United Kingdom.

In the fourth chapter, the author compares the court system of India, United States and United Kingdom with
each other and points out the differences between these systems.

In the last chapter, the author summarises the whole topic.

5|Page
 Objectives
I. To understand the functioning of court system of India, United States and United Kingdom.

II. To draw a comparison between court system of India, United States and United Kingdom.

6|Page
 Research Methodology
This Research Project is descriptive and doctrinal in nature. Accumulation of the information on the topic
includes wide use of secondary sources like books, newspapers, e-articles etc. The matter from these sources
have been compiled and analysed to understand the concept from the grass root level.

Websites, articles and dictionaries have also been referred.

The structure of the project, as instructed by the faculty of law has been adhered to and the same has been
helpful in giving the project a fine finish off.

Scope of work
The scope of study includes the purview within which the project work lies. This topic has

been clearly enunciated with the help of articles from journals and other such e-article

databases that have been explored. The subject explores the different Rules of Interpretation, its advantages
and disadvantages.

Mode of citation
For generations, legal researchers, students of law, lawyers, scholars, judges, and other legal professionals
have relied on the Bluebook’s unique system of citation in their writings. As the legal profession is changing
rapidly, the Bluebook continues to maintain a systematic and uniform standard of citations, to communicate
important information and the sources and legal authorities upon which they rely in their research work.

I, Arush Parihar, have followed “the Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, Harvard Law Review
Association” standards in the citations, in this thesis.

7|Page
 CHAPTER I

Court System of India

The Indian Judicial System is one of the oldest legal systems in the world today. It is part of the inheritance
India received from the British after more than 200 years of their Colonial rule, and the same is obvious from
the many similarities the Indian legal system shares with the English Legal System. The frame work of the
current legal system has been laid down by the Indian Constitution and the judicial system derives its powers
from it.1

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the country, the fountain source of law in India. It came into
effect on 26 January 1950 and is the world’s longest written constitution.

It not only laid the framework of Indian judicial system, but has also laid out the powers, duties, procedures
and structure of the various branches of the Government at the Union and State levels. Moreover, it also has
defined the fundamental rights & duties of the people and the directive principles which are the duties of the
State.

Inspite of India adopting the features of a federal system of government, the Constitution has provided for the
setting up of a single integrated system of courts to administer both Union and State laws. The Supreme Court
is the apex court of India, followed by the various High Courts at the state level which cater to one or more
number of states. Below the High Courts exist the subordinate courts comprising of the District Courts at the
district level and other lower courts.

An important feature of the Indian Judicial System, is that it’s a ‘common law system’. In a common law
system, law is developed by the judges through their decisions, orders, or judgments. These are also referred
to as precedents. Unlike the British legal system which is entirely based on the common law system, where it
had originated from, the Indian system incorporates the common law system along with the statutory law and
the regulatory law.

Another important feature of the Indian Judicial system is that our system has been designed on the pattern of
the adversarial system. This is to be expected since courts based on the common law system tend to follow
the adversarial system of conducting proceedings instead of the inquisitorial system. In an adversarial system,

1
(October 10:37 PM) http://www.silf.org.in/16/indian-judicial-system.htm
8|Page
there are two sides in every case and each side presents its arguments to a neutral judge who would then give
an order or a judgment based upon the merits of the case.

Indian judicial system has adopted features of other legal systems in such a way that they do not conflict with
each other while benefitting the nation and the people. For example, the Supreme Court and the High Courts
have the power of judicial review. This is a concept prevalent in the American legal system. According to the
concept of judicial review, the legislative and executive actions are subject to the scrutiny of the judiciary and
the judiciary can invalidate such actions if they are ultra vires of the Constitutional provisions. In other words,
the laws made by the legislative and the rules made by the executive need to be in conformity with the
Constitution of India.

The powers and the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the High Courts and subordinate courts like the District
Courts are discussed below.

Jurisdiction & Powers of the Courts

Supreme Court of India

One of the most important powers of the Supreme Court of India is that any law declared or order/judgment
passed by it is binding on all the courts within the territory of India.

The jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court (SC) are defined under Articles 131 to 142 of the Indian
Constitution. The jurisdiction includes original, writ, and appellate jurisdiction.2

Original Jurisdiction refers to the power of the court to hear disputes when they arise for the first time. By
exercising its power of Original jurisdiction the Supreme Court can hear disputes between,

 Government of India (GoI) and one or more States, or

 GoI & any State or States on one side and one or more States on the other, or

 Two or more States, if it involves a question - of law or fact - on which depends the existence or extent
of a legal right.

The Supreme Court has also been conferred the power to issue directions or order or writs under Article 32 of
the Constitution for the enforcement of any of the rights provided under Part III of the Constitution, including

2
(October 11, 10:24 PM) https://www.toppr.com/guides/general-knowledge/the-judiciary-system-of-india/judiciary-system/
9|Page
the Fundamental Rights. This is referred to as the Writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The writ jurisdiction
of the Apex court under Article 32 is part of its original jurisdiction.

[For more details on Original jurisdiction kindly refer to Articles 32&131 of the Indian Constitution.]

Appellate jurisdiction refers to the power of the Apex court to hear appeals against any judgment, decree or
final order (or sentence) of a High Court in a constitutional, civil or criminal case, where exists a substantial
question of interpretation of

 the constitution, or

 a law of general importance

in case of a death sentence awarded in criminal matters.

However, an additional requirement is that the concerned High Court (HC) under Article 134A has to certify
that the case in question is fit for an appeal to the SC.

The Supreme Court can also grant special leave to appeal against any judgment, decree, determination,
sentence or order passed by any court or tribunal in the territory of India in any matter. The exception to this
rule is the orders, judgments etc passed by any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the
Armed Forces.

[The Appellate jurisdiction of SC can be read in more detail under Articles 132 – 136.]

Apart from the original, appellate and writ jurisdiction, the Supreme Court also has special advisory
jurisdiction regarding matters referred to it by the President if India under Article 143 of the Constitution.

The Apex court also has the power and authority to review any order or judgment passed by it as well as
transfer cases from one High Court to another or from the District Court of one state to the District Court of
another State.

High Courts of India

The High Courts of India are the supreme judicial authority at the State level. There are currently 21 High
Courts in the country and of these the oldest High Court of India is the Kolkata High Court, which was
established in the year 1862.

10 | P a g e
Their powers and jurisdiction are similar to that of the Apex court, but with a few differences –

 Any law declared or orders/judgments passed by them are not binding on the other High Courts (HCs)
of the country or the subordinate courts which fall under the purview of the other HCs unless the other
High Courts choose to follow such law or order or judgment.
 Their territorial jurisdiction is varied.

The High Courts are the appellate authority for a State or group of States and get a lot of matters in appeal
from the subordinate courts.

They have the power to issue writs, just like the Apex court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, but with
one difference. While the Supreme Court has the power to issue writs to enforce only the rights provided under
Part III of the Constitution, the High Courts can issue writs for enforcement of the rights under Part III as well
as “for any other purpose”.

Just like in the case of the Supreme Court, the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is also part of their Original
jurisdiction, since all writ petitions are filed directly before the High Court. Apart from writ petitions, any
civil or criminal case which does not fall within the purview or ambit of the subordinate courts of a State, due
to lack of pecuniary or territorial jurisdiction, can be heard by the High Court of that State. Also certain other
matters or issues may be heard by the High Court as part of its original jurisdiction, if the law laid down by
the legislature provides for it. For example, the company law cases fall within the original jurisdiction of the
High Court.

Therefore, the High Courts’ work primarily consists of appeals from the lower courts as well as the writ
petitions filed before it under Article 226.

The territorial jurisdiction of a High Court, as mentioned earlier, is varied.

Both the Supreme Court and the High Courts are courts of record and have all the powers associated with such
a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.

The Subordinate Courts

The District Courts are at the top of all the subordinate or lower courts. They are however under the
administrative control of the High Court of the State to which the district court belongs to.

11 | P a g e
The basis of structuring of district courts in India is mainly depending upon the discretion of the state
governments or the union territories. The structure of those courts are mainly made considering several factors
like the number of cases, distribution of population, etc. Depending upon those factors the state government
takes the decision of numbers of District Courts to be in operation for single district or clubbing together
different adjacent districts.3

Their jurisdiction is confined to the districts they are responsible for, which could be just one or more than
one. The original jurisdiction of the District Courts in civil matters is confined by not just the territorial
limitations, but by pecuniary limitations as well. The pecuniary limitations are laid down by the legislature
and if the amount in dispute in a matter is way above the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Court, then the
matter will be heard by the concerned High Court of that State.In case of criminal matters, the jurisdiction of
the courts is laid down by the legislature. Apart from these judicial bodies who enforce the laws and rules laid
down by the legislature and executive and also interpret them (the Supreme Court & High Courts), there are
numerous quasi judicial bodies who are involved in dispute resolutions. These quasi judicial bodies are the
Tribunals and Regulators.

Tribunals are constituted as per relevant statutory provisions and are seen as an alternative forum for redressal
of grievances and adjudication of disputes other than the Courts.

Some of the important tribunals are, Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Telecom Disputes Settlement
Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT), Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT),
Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), etc.

The kind of cases the tribunals hear are limited to their specific area. That is TDSAT can hear only matters
related to telecom disputes and not matters of armed forces personnel. So the area of operation of these
tribunals are marked out at the beginning itself by the statute under which its constituted.

The same hold true for the various Regulators like – TRAI, DERC, etc. They regulate the activities of
companies which fall under their purview as per the statute.

Thus, the Indian Judicial System is a mix of the Courts and the Tribunals & Regulators, and all these entities
working together as part of an integrated system for the benefit of the nation.

3
https://ipleaders.in/courts-justice-system-india/
12 | P a g e
 CHAPTER II

Court System of the United States

Introduction to the Federal Court System

The federal court system has three main levels: district courts (the trial court), circuit courts which are the first
level of appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United States, the final level of appeal in the federal system.
There are 94 district courts, 13 circuit courts, and one Supreme Court throughout the country.

Courts in the federal system work differently in many ways than state courts. The primary difference for civil
cases (as opposed to criminal cases) is the types of cases that can be heard in the federal system. Federal courts
are courts of limited jurisdiction, meaning they can only hear cases authorized by the United States
Constitution or federal statutes. The federal district court is the starting point for any case arising under federal
statutes, the Constitution, or treaties. This type of jurisdiction is called “original jurisdiction.” Sometimes, the
jurisdiction of state courts will overlap with that of federal courts, meaning that some cases can be brought in
both courts. The plaintiff has the initial choice of bringing the case in state or federal court. However, if the
plaintiff chooses state court, the defendant may sometimes choose to “remove” to federal court.4

Cases that are entirely based on state law may be brought in federal court under the court’s “diversity
jurisdiction.” Diversity jurisdiction allows a plaintiff of one state to file a lawsuit in federal court when the
defendant is located in a different state. The defendant can also seek to “remove” from state court for the same
reason. To bring a state law claim in federal court, all of the plaintiffs must be located in different states than
all of the defendants, and the “amount in controversy” must be more than $75,000. (Note: the rules for
diversity jurisdiction are much more complicated than explained here.)

Criminal cases may not be brought under diversity jurisdiction. States may only bring criminal prosecutions
in state courts, and the federal government may only bring criminal prosecutions in federal court. Also
important to note, the principle of double jeopardy – which does not allow a defendant to be tried twice for
the same charge – does not apply between the federal and state government. If, for example, the state brings
a murder charge and does not get a conviction, it is possible for the federal government in some cases to file
charges against the defendant if the act is also illegal under federal law.

4
(October 13, 7:45 PM)https://www.justice.gov/usao/justice-101/federal-courts
13 | P a g e
Federal judges (and Supreme Court “justices”) are selected by the President and confirmed “with the advice
and consent” of the Senate and “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.” Judges may hold their position
for the rest of their lives, but many resign or retire earlier. They may also be removed by impeachment by the
House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. Throughout history, fourteen federal judges have been
impeached due to alleged wrongdoing. One exception to the lifetime appointment is for magistrate judges,
which are selected by district judges and serve a specified term.

District Courts

The district courts are the general trial courts of the federal court system. Each district court has at least one
United States District Judge, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a life term. District
courts handle trials within the federal court system – both civil and criminal. The districts are the same as
those for the U.S. Attorneys, and the U.S. Attorney is the primary prosecutor for the federal government in
his or her respective area.

District court judges are responsible for managing the court and supervising the court’s employees. They are
able to continue to serve so long as they maintain “good behavior,” and they can be impeached and removed
by Congress. There are over 670 district court judges nationwide.

Some tasks of the district court are given to federal magistrate judges. Magistrates are appointed by the district
court by a majority vote of the judges and serve for a term of eight years if full-time and four years if part-
time, but they can be reappointed after completion of their term. In criminal matters, magistrate judges may
oversee certain cases, issue search warrants and arrest warrants, conduct inital hearings, set bail, decide certain
motions (such as a motion to suppress evidence), and other similar actions. In civil cases, magistrates often
handle a variety of issues such as pre-trial motions and discovery.

Federal trial courts have also been established for a few subject-specific areas. Each federal district also has a
bankruptcy court for those proceedings. Additionally, some courts have nationwide jurisdiction for issues such
as tax (United States Tax Court), claims against the federal government (United States Court of Federal
Claims), and international trade (United States Court of International Trade).

Circuit Courts

Once the federal district court has decided a case, the case can be appealed to a United States court of appeal.
There are twelve federal circuits that divide the country into different regions. The Fifth Circuit, for example,
includes the states of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Cases from the district courts of those states are
14 | P a g e
appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which is headquartered in New Orleans,
Louisiana. Additionally, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has a nationwide jurisdiction over very specific
issues such as patents.

Each circuit court has multiple judges, ranging from six on the First Circuit to twenty-nine on the Ninth Circuit.
Circuit court judges are appointed for life by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Any case may be appealed to the circuit court once the district court has finalized a decision (some issues can
be appealed before a final decision by making an “interlocutory appeal”). Appeals to circuit courts are first
heard by a panel, consisting of three circuit court judges. Parties file “briefs” to the court, arguing why the
trial court’s decision should be “affirmed” or “reversed.” After the briefs are filed, the court will schedule
“oral argument” in which the lawyers come before the court to make their arguments and answer the judges’
questions.

Though it is rare, the entire circuit court may consider certain appeals in a process called an “en banc hearing.”
(The Ninth Circuit has a different process for en banc than the rest of the circuits.) En banc opinions tend to
carry more weight and are usually decided only after a panel has first heard the case. Once a panel has ruled
on an issue and “published” the opinion, no future panel can overrule the previous decision. The panel can,
however, suggest that the circuit take up the case en banc to reconsider the first panel’s decision.

Beyond the Federal Circuit, a few courts have been established to deal with appeals on specific subjects such
as veterans claims (United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) and military matters (United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces).

Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the American judicial system, and has the
power to decide appeals on all cases brought in federal court or those brought in state court but dealing with
federal law. For example, if a First Amendment freedom of speech case was decided by the highest court of a
state (usually the state supreme court), the case could be appealed to the federal Supreme Court. However, if
that same case were decided entirely on a state law similar to the First Amendment, the Supreme Court of the
United States would not be able to consider the case.

All appeals to the United States Supreme Court, whether from a state Supreme Court or from a federal
Court of Appeals, are discretionary. The person bringing the appeal (called the petitioner) files a petition for
a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. The Court has total discretion as to whether it wants to hear a
particular case or not. It takes four votes from the nine justices to grant the writ of certiorari and hear the

15 | P a g e
case. The Court usually basis its decision on the importance of the legal issue involved to the country as a
whole. 5

After the circuit court or state supreme court has ruled on a case, either party may choose to appeal to the
Supreme Court. Unlike circuit court appeals, however, the Supreme Court is usually not required to hear the
appeal. Parties may file a “writ of certiorari” to the court, asking it to hear the case. If the writ is granted, the
Supreme Court will take briefs and conduct oral argument. If the writ is not granted, the lower court’s opinion
stands. Certiorari is not often granted; less than 1% of appeals to the high court are actually heard by it. The
Court typically hears cases when there are conflicting decisions across the country on a particular issue or
when there is an egregious error in a case.

The members of the Court are referred to as “justices” and, like other federal judges, they are appointed by
the President and confirmed by the Senate for a life term. There are nine justices on the court – eight associate
justices and one chief justice. The Constitution sets no requirements for Supreme Court justices, though all
current members of the court are lawyers and most have served as circuit court judges. Justices are also often
former law professors. The chief justice acts as the administrator of the court and is chosen by the President
and approved by the Congress when the position is vacant.

The Supreme Court meets in Washington, D.C. The court conducts its annual term from the first Monday of
October until each summer, usually ending in late June.

5
(October 13, 9:10 PM) https://home.ubalt.edu/shapiro/rights_course/Chapter2text.htm
16 | P a g e
 CHAPTER III

Court System in United Kingdom

England and Wales has a common law legal system, which has been established by the subject matter heard
in earlier cases and so is the law created by judges. It originated during the reign of King Henry II (1154-89),
when many local customary laws were replaced by new national ones, which applied to all and were thus
"common to all".

The main sources of domestic law are set out below.

Acts of Parliament
Although the UK has an unwritten constitution, many important elements of it are found in statutes that have
been enacted by Parliament. The following are of most importance to the constitution and civil liberties:
 Magna Carta 1215. This embodies the principle that government must be conducted according to the law
and with the consent of the governed.
 Bill of Rights 1689. This imposed limitations on the powers of the monarch and provided that Parliament
should meet on a regular basis.
 Act of Settlement 1701. This prohibited Catholics from succeeding to the throne and gave precedence to
male heirs. It also established the constitutional independence of the judiciary.
 Acts of Union 1706-07. These united England and Scotland under a single Parliament of Great Britain (that
is, the Westminster Parliament).
 Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949. These ensured that the will of the elected House of Commons would
prevail over that of the unelected House of Lords by enabling legislation to be enacted without the consent
of the House of Lords.
 European Communities Act 1972. This incorporated EU law and EU legal systems into domestic law .
 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. This provides the police with wide powers of arrest, search and
detention as well as accompanying safeguards to ensure that the police do not abuse such powers.
 Public Order Act 1986. This allows limitations to be placed on the rights of citizens to hold meetings and
demonstrations in public places.
 Human Rights Act 1998. This incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law
and allows citizens to raised alleged breaches of their human rights before the domestic courts.

17 | P a g e
The general court structure and hierarchy is set out below. Note, however, that there was an extensive review
of the civil court system in England and Wales in 2016, commissioned by the Lord Chief Justice. The final
report "The Civil Courts Structure Review" was published on 27 July 2016. The review made a series of
recommendations intended to inform the current programme of wider court modernisation being undertaken
by HM Courts and Tribunals Service. It also made a number of recommendations on different aspects of the
civil justice system, such as enforcement of court rulings, the structure of the courts and deployment of judges.

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in the UK. It hears appeals on arguable points of law of public
importance for the whole of the UK in civil cases, and for England and Wales and Northern Ireland in criminal
cases. In Scotland, appeals can be made from the lower courts in criminal cases to the High Court of Justiciary.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which comprises justices of the Supreme Court and some senior
Commonwealth judges, is the final court of appeal for a number of Commonwealth countries, as well as the
UK's overseas territories, Crown dependencies and military sovereign bases.

The Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal and the High Court constitute the "senior courts" of England and Wales. The Court of
Appeal is an appellate court and is divided into two divisions, Criminal and Civil.

The High Court

The High Court hears the more serious and complex civil and family cases at first instance. It contains three
divisions: Queen's Bench, Family and Chancery.

The Queen's Bench Division is the biggest of the three High Court Divisions. Included within it are a number
of specialist courts: the Admiralty, Commercial, Mercantile, Technology and Construction, and
Administrative Courts.

The Chancery Division deals with company law, partnership claims, conveyancing, land law, probate, patent
and taxation cases. This Division has three specialist courts: the Companies Court, the Patents Court and the
Bankruptcy Court.

England and Wales is split into six circuits or distinct geographical regions for the practice of law. They are
the areas around which the High Court judges travel. The six circuits are: South Eastern, North Eastern,
Midland, Northern, Wales and Western.

18 | P a g e
The County Court
There are approximately 160 county courts that hear cases within their geographic catchment area. These
courts deal with civil (non-criminal and non-family) cases. The county court hears (subject to exceptions)
money claims with a value up to and including GBP100,000 and claims for damages for personal injury with
a value up to GBP50,000. Cases are ordinarily held where the defendant resides.6

The Family Court

The Family Court was established in 2014. It has national jurisdiction and brought all levels of family judiciary
to sit together in the same court.

The Crown Court

The Crown Court sits in centres around England and Wales. This deals with indictable criminal cases that are
transferred from the Magistrates' Courts, including serious criminal cases.

Magistrates' Courts
These courts hear all criminal cases at first instance. Less serious cases and those involving juveniles are tried
in the Magistrates' Courts, as well as some civil cases.

Magistrates deal with three kinds of offence: summary (less serious cases); either-way (cases that can be heard
either in a Magistrates' Court or before a judge and a jury in the Crown Court); and indictable-only (serious
cases).

Within the English common law system, judges have more authority to interpret law but are bound by
precedent.
A judgment contains the facts of a case, the legal position or reason for the decision (ratio) and the decision
itself. The ratio sets a binding precedent for the lower courts. There is flexibility built into the system by the
ability to overrule (usually by a higher court) and to distinguish one case from another. Note that:
 A ratio can be overruled. For instance, a ratio set out in one case can be overruled if it is held to be incorrect
in a later case in the same or a higher court.
 A decision can be reversed on appeal. A party that is unsuccessful in a case against another can appeal to
a higher court on the ground that the lower court incorrectly applied the law. The appeal court may decide
to hold the ratio given by the lower court to be incorrect and reverse the decision.

There are a number of specialist courts. For example, Coroners' Courts investigate sudden, violent or unnatural
deaths. They do this by holding an inquest. The evidence is considered and, from that, a cause of death is
established. The Court Martial deals with the criminal trials of servicemen and women in the Royal Navy, the

6
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/5-636-
2498?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&comp=pluk&bhcp=1
19 | P a g e
Army and the Royal Air Force for serious offences, or cases where the defendant chooses not to be dealt with
by his or her commanding officer. Since October 2015, a specialist Financial List handles claims related
specifically to the financial markets. The claim is brought on the basis that it raises issues of general
importance to the financial markets.

The UK has a predominantly adversarial court system in which the parties investigate their own cases and call
their own evidence. A case is argued by two opposing sides who have the primary responsibility for finding
and presenting facts.
In civil cases, the claimant tries to prove that the defendant has committed a breach of a legal duty and the
defendant argues that it did not commit such a breach. The introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)
in 1999 has to some extent altered the role of the judge in civil cases to allow for a more interventionist judicial
case management role but his or her role in the trial is generally a passive role.
In a criminal case, the Crown (prosecutor) tries to prove that the defendant is guilty and the defendant's lawyer
argues for their acquittal (that is, that they did not commit the crime charged).

20 | P a g e
 CHAPTER IV
Comparison between court systems of India, US and UK

Comparison between judiciary system of India and United States

In India, the Supreme Court is the apex court of India, followed by the various High Courts at the state level
which cater to one or more number of states. Below the High Courts exist the subordinate courts comprising
of the District Courts at the district level and other lower courts whereas in United States, the federal court
system has three main levels: district courts (the trial court), circuit courts which are the first level of appeal,
and the Supreme Court of the United States, the final level of appeal in the federal system.

There are 94 district courts, 13 circuit courts, and one Supreme Court throughout the country in United States
whereas there are more than 600 district courts, 24 High Court and one Supreme Court in India.

In the United States, Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) has made federal-court case files
and dockets, publicly available over the Internet since 1997. Accessible case files encourage judicial officers
to act lawfully and fairly when deliberating cases. Furthermore, it discourages lawyers from malpractice and
misconduct. It popularizes the law by making it accessible to the public. This provides a platform for
academics and the media to analyze the law and give an overview to the general public. This is an essential
weapon against corruption in the judiciary system. This is the system of the United States.

In India, the best available tool for demanding accountability and transparency from the government is the
Right to Information Act; a statutory code for citizens to exercise their right to acquire any information from
the government. The judiciary praises this act and expects other bodies of the government to follow it.
However, when it comes to the application of the act on the judiciary body, it argues and recommends the
judiciary be left out of the act’s reach. This creates the appearance the judiciary is acting above the law at its
discretion.

Like the American Supreme Court, the Supreme Court of India enjoys the power of judicial review and this
power has been specifically recognised by the constitution. However, we see that its authority in relation to
‘judicial review’ of legislation is more restricted than that of the American Supreme Court.

21 | P a g e
Though the courts have the power of judicial review, the same cannot be exercised in an arbitrary fashion. If
the law-making power of parliament is not unlimited, the courts` power to review the laws passed by
parliament is also not unlimited. Like other organs of the state, the judiciary derives its powers from the
constitution and the judges are as much under the constitution as anyone else. They can interpret and invalidate
laws but they cannot themselves assume the law making function; nor can they confer that function on any
person or institution other than the federal or provincial legislatures. Nor can the courts make constitutional
what is manifestly unconstitutional. Sovereignty is located neither in parliament nor in the judiciary but in the
constitution itself.

In Chandler v. Florida, 449 U.S. 560 (1981), the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may adopt rules
permitting cameras and recording equipment in their courts. Since then, all 50 states have adopted the general
practice of in-court recordings. This makes judicial proceedings more accessible to the public and media,
which results in significant awareness of court proceedings and etiquette. Furthermore, it provides a sense of
accountability and transparency of the Courts to the citizens.

In India, despite filing numerous public interest litigation cases to the Supreme Court, the system fails to
address the essential need for in-court recordings. This leaves most people unaware of judicial proceedings,
court etiquette and functions of the Court.

Comparison between judiciary system of the United States and United Kingdom

Attorneys probably already know legal systems in both the U.K. and the U.S. share the same historical
common law roots, and are for that reason quite similar. The purpose of this post, though, is to highlight a few
of the key divergences in order to give attorneys a sense of how the U.S. and U.K. legal systems differ.

A note on states

Much like the main subdivisions of the U.K. (i.e. England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland), the states
of the U.S. have their own laws, court systems, and bar associations. In the U.S., federal law and court
decisions generally take precedence over these state laws and decisions. Powers not granted to the federal
government are instead specifically reserved to the states in the U.S. Constitution.

Court systems

Court systems in both countries are quite similar. Minor criminal offenses and small civil disputes are handled
by special magistrate courts tasked with resolving such disputes. In the U.S., these are cases for state courts
almost exclusively.

22 | P a g e
More serious crimes and civil cases in both countries are then subject to a three-court hierarchy. In the U.S.,
at the federal level, criminal cases and civil cases are not heard by separate courts (at the state level, however,
many states do have separate court systems for these two types of cases). Cases begin in lower courts (Crown
Court in the U.K., District Court in the U.S.), then move on to Courts of Appeals, and are finally resolved in
a single Supreme Court, if necessary.

It is important to note that the U.S. does not have a “Tribunal System” as the U.K. does for certain disputes.
There are, however, niche courts for certain types of cases (e.g. bankruptcy court is a separate type of federal
court). In the U.S., parties may also agree to submit to binding arbitration or mediation as a means of
alternative dispute resolution in certain cases. This often provides a less costly, more streamlined, and less
adversarial way to conclude conflicts.

Sources of legal authority

Much like courts in the U.K., courts in the U.S. rely mainly on past judicial opinions as authoritative precedent
when resolving litigation. In the U.S., these are often referred to as “opinions” or simply “cases,” while the
phrase “law report” has become somewhat archaic.

As readers will also likely know, for legislation, the U.S. has two centralized federal bodies, the House of
Representatives and the Senate (together, known as the Congress), which are similar to the Houses of
Parliament. Each of the 50 states in the U.S. is afforded two senators, while representatives are allocated
proportionally based on each state’s population.

In order to become a law in the U.S., a bill under discussion must be approved by a majority of both
congressional bodies, and then signed into law by the President. If the President refuses to sign the bill into
law, his or her veto can be overridden by a two-thirds majority vote in Congress.

Roles of lawyers

Aside from differences in nomenclature, the roles of lawyers in both countries are quite similar. The terms
“barrister” and “solicitor” are not commonly used in the U.S., and litigators and non-litigators are not
separately licensed. Instead, once an attorney is admitted to the bar in a particular state, he or she may generally
practice any kind of law. For the sake of clarity: court-going barristers are known as “litigators” in the U.S.,
and solicitors are called “corporate” or “transactional” attorneys, or are referred to in accordance with their
area of specialization (e.g., a health care attorney, a real estate attorney, a family law practitioner, etc.).

Comparison between judiciary system of the India and United Kingdom

23 | P a g e
Indian Judiciary is the continuation of the British Legal system established by the English in the mid-19th
century based on a typical hybrid legal system in which customs, precedents and legislative law have validity
of law. Constitution of India is the supreme authority of the country. There are various levels of judiciary in
India — different types of courts have different styles of judges. They also form a strict hierarchy of
importance, in line with the order of the courts in which they sit, with Supreme Court of India at the top,
followed by High Courts of respective states with district judges sitting in District Courts and Magistrates of
Second Class and Civil Judge (Junior Division) at the bottom.

The courts of England are headed by the Senior Courts of England and Wales, consisting of the Court of
Appeal, the High Court of Justice (for civil cases) and the Crown Court (for criminal cases). The Supreme
Court is the highest court in the land for both criminal and civil appeal cases in England, Wales, and
Northern Ireland and any decision it makes is binding on every other court in the same jurisdiction, and
often has persuasive effect in its other jurisdictions.

In India, the Supreme Court is the apex court of India, followed by the various High Courts at the state level
which cater to one or more number of states. Below the High Courts exist the subordinate courts comprising
of the District Courts at the district level and other lower courtsIn United Kingdom, different types of case
are dealt with in specific courts: for example, all criminal cases will start in the magistrates’ court, but the
more serious criminal matters are committed (or sent) to the Crown Court. Appeals from the Crown Court
will go to the High Court, and potentially to the Court of Appeal or even the Supreme Court.Civil cases will
sometimes be dealt with by magistrates, but may well go to a county court. Again, appeals will go to the
High Court and then to the Court of Appeal – although to different divisions of those courts.

24 | P a g e
 Conclusion

The judicial system is one of the three branches of government set up by the founding fathers. The court
system, in most cases, protects individuals from undue prosecution. Court system of a country plays an
important role in settling all disputes and providing justice to the people of the country. The real ‗meaning of
law is what the judges decide during the course of giving their judgements in various cases. From the citizen‘s
point of view, Judiciary is the most important organ of the government because it acts as their protector against
the possible excesses of legislative and executive organs. Role of Judiciary as the guardian protector of the
constitution and the fundamental rights of the people makes it more respectable than other two organs. The
judicial system of the United States is tasked with the two objectives of protecting the rights of its citizens and
interpreting the law as it relates to each case presented. The judicial system is made up of multiple layers of
courts from state courts that deal with specific issues such as traffic enforcement all the way to the United
States Supreme Court. The Judiciary in India performs various important functions through its court system
like prevention of violation of law, making new law, deciding on constitutional questions, interpreting laws
and acts as a guardian of constitution. Indian judicial system has adopted features of other legal systems in
such a way that they do not conflict with each other while benefitting the nation and the people. Thus, the
Indian Judicial System is a mix of the Courts and the Tribunals & Regulators, and all these entities working
together as part of an integrated system for the benefit of the nation.
The UK has a predominantly adversarial court system in which the parties investigate their own cases and call
their own evidence. A case is argued by two opposing sides who have the primary responsibility for finding
and presenting facts. In civil cases, the claimant tries to prove that the defendant has committed a breach of a
legal duty and the defendant argues that it did not commit such a breach.In a criminal case, the Crown
(prosecutor) tries to prove that the defendant is guilty and the defendant's lawyer argues for their acquittal
(that is, that they did not commit the crime charged).
To sum up, in my opinion the judicial system is the most important because it is the judicial branch of our
government that provides the checks and balance that make our whole system work. Not only does it protect
the law and rights given to us as, but makes sure that all branches of the government are working to do their
job, of the people, by the people and for the people of the country. There may be differences between judicial
system of different countries but main aim is to protect the rights of people and act as a guardian protector of
constitution and rights.

25 | P a g e
 Reference

 www.silf.org.in
 https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com
 https://home.ubalt.edu
 www.Jstor.org
 www.Scribd.com
 www.ipleaders.in
 India's Legal System, Fali Sam Nariman
 www.toppr.com

OP

26 | P a g e