2018: Q1: Define jurisprudence.

Explain Kinds of Jurisprudence:

2017: Q1: Define jurisprudence. So also explain Jurisprudence under the Keton School of law.

2015: Q1: Define jurisprudence and discuss about the school of thoughts of Jurisprudence.
The study of jurisprudence started with the Romans. The definitions gives by the Roman jurists are vague
and inadequate but they put forth the idea of a legal science. Every jurist has its own notion of the subject
matter and the proper limits of jurisprudence depends upon his ideology and the nature of society. The
world jurisprudence used is different languages in different senses. In French it refers “case law”. These
has been a shift during the last one
century and jurisprudence today is envisaged in more broader sense than it had understood in Australia
age.
The term jurisprudence is derived from the Latin word “Jurisprudentia” which means either “Knowledge of
law” or “skill in law”
Following definitions have been given by the leading jurists.
I. Austin’ s Definition:
Austin defines jurisprudence as “ the philosophy of positive law” positive law laid down by a political
superior for controlling the conduct of those subjects to his authority.
Austin divided the jurisprudence into following:
(i) General Jurisprudence (ii) Particular Jurisprudence
(i) General Jurisprudence:
General Jurisprudence includes such subject or ends of law as are common to all systems.
(ii) Particular Jurisprudence:
Particular Jurisprudence is the science of any actual system of law or any portion of it.
Holland’ s Definition Of Jurisprudence:
Sir Thomas Erskine Holland defines Jurisprudence as “The formal science of positive law”.
Salmond defines Jurisprudence as “The Science of Law”. By law he means the “law of the
land”Or “civil”.
Salmond uses the term Jurisprudence is two senses.
(i) Generic sense:
Generic jurisprudence includes the entire body of legal doctrines. In that sense, jurisprudence is of 3 kinds.
(a) Expository or Systematic Jurisprudence:
It deals with the contents of an actual legal system as existing law at any time, whether in past or in
presents.
(b) Legal History:
It deals with the history of development of law.
(c) Science of legislation:
The purpose of the science of legislation is to set forth law as it be. It deals with the ideal of the legal
system and the purpose for which it exists.
Specific Sense:
Specific jurisprudence deals with a particular department of legal doctrines. In this sense, it is also called
theoretical or general jurisprudence . it is also defined as “the science of the first principal of the Civil
Law.”
In this sense, he divides the subject into 3 branches:
(a) Analytical Jurisprudence
(b) Historical Jurisprudence
(c) Ethical Jurisprudence

According To Keeton:
“ Jurisprudence is the study and systematic arrangement of the general principles of law.”

Keeton said that the sources of law has emerged as a critique of Salmond’s classification. He defines the term as those
materials from which law is eventually fashioned through judicial activity. He classified the sources of law into- binding
sources and persuasive sources. Binding sources are those which have to be necessarily followed by the courts.
Legislations, judicial precedents and customs are examples of such source. Persuasive sources are those which come
into play when there is absence of any binding source on any particular subject. Foreign precedents, professional
opinions and principles of morality or equity are examples of persuasive sources of law.
2018: Q2: What are the persons? Whether animals, dead human beings and unborn persons
are also persons in legal language?

2016: Q6:Define the types of persons in Jurisprudence?

2014: Q2: What are the persons? Whether animals, dead human beings and unborn persons
are also persons in legal language?

The word “Person” is derived from the Latin word “Persona”. To begin with, it simply meant mask then it
was used to denote the part played by a man in life and then in the sense of a man who played the part.
But now under a legal theory, a person is any being who is capable of sustaining rights and duties.
According To Salmond:
“A person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights or duties. Any being that is so capable is
a person whether a human being or not so capable is a person even though he is a men.”
II. According To Gray:
“Person is an entity to which rights and duties may be attributed.”

Animals
Beasts were regarded as persons in the old days. There are examples in Greek law where they tried and
punished for offences to human beings. In modern law animals are not regarded as person, they are
things. The only natural person
are human beings and beasts are not person either natural or legal. They are merely things.
Following are the reasons for incapability of animals as person.
They are often the object of legal rights and duties but never the subject of them.
Their acts are neither lawful nor unlawful.
They are not recognized by law as the appropriate subject-matter either of permission or prohibition.
A beast in incapable of legal rights as of legal duties.
His interests are not recognized by law.
They possess moral rights but those are not recognized by any legal system.
No animal can be owner of any property even through the medium of a human trustee.
There are two cases in which beasts may be thought to possess legal rights.
(i) Cruelty to animals is a criminal offence.
(ii) A trustee for the benefit of particular class of animals is made like broken down horses.

Dead Person:
The personality of human being commences its existence on birth and ceases to exist at death. Dead men
are no longer persons in the eye of law. They have no rights because they have no interests. All that the
law does is, it to some degree recognizes and takes into account after a man, s death his desires and
interests when alive.
There are three things in respect of which the anxieties of living men extend even after their
death. Those are his body his reputation and his estate.
(i) Body:
A living men is interested in the treatment to be given to his own dead-body. A corpse is the property of on
one. It cannot be disposed of by will or any other instrument criminal law secures a decent burial for all
dead men and the violation of a grave is a criminal offence.
(ii) Reputation:
The reputation of a person receives some degree of protection form criminal law. A libel upon a dead man
is punished as a misdemeanor when its publication is an attack on the interests of living person. As a
matter of fact this right is in reality not that of the dead person but of his living descendents.
(iii) Property:
A dead man continue to determine the enjoyment of the property, which he owned, while he was alive.
The law of succession permits the desires of the dead person to regulate the actions of the living persons.
In addition to this, hatever he has left behind to distributed as gifts or given in charity will be respect by
law and enforced according to his wishes laid down is a proper document i.e., will deed.

Unborn Person:
The law given a statue of person to a child who is not yet been born but conceived in its mother’ s womb.
According to coke:
“The law in many cases hath consideration of him in respect of the apparent expectation of his birth,
The rights of unborn person whether proprietary or personal are all contingent on his birth as living human
being.
Following are the rights of a unborn person.
(i) Rights to Compensation:
An unborn child is entitled to compensation for the death of his father, willful or negligent injury inflicted
on a child in the womb.
(ii) Rights to be born:
An unborn person has a right to be born and abortion and child destruction are declared as crimes to
protect his right of him. A pregnant woman condemned to death is respited as of right until she has been
delivered of her child.
(iii) Right to Inherit:
In unborn child may inherit, but if he dies in the womb or is still-born, his inheritance fails to take effect
and on one claim thought him.
(iv) Beneficiary of trust:
An unborn child may be made beneficiary of the trust and such trust cannot be varied without obtaining
the consent of the Court on their behalf.
(v) Right to own:
There is nothing in law to prevent a man form owing property before he is born. His ownership is
contingent on his born alive and once born alive, his contingent ownership will become vested.
(vi) Right to gift:
A direct gift may be made to the child in womb.

2018: Q3: Define “Customs” and explain the difference between the “Custom and “Law”.

2015: Q5: Define “Customs” and explain the difference between the “Custom and “Law”.

2014: Q7: Write Notes (i) difference between the “Custom and “Law”.
A study of ancient shows that law-making was not the business of the kings. Law of the country was to be
found in the customs of the people which developed spontaneously according to circumstances. It was felt
that a particular way of doing things was more convenient than others when the same things was done
again and again in a particular way,
it assumed the of custom. According to salmond custom is the legal source of law.
According to Salmond:
“Custom is the embodiment of those principles which have commended themselves to the national and
national conscience as the principles of justice and public utility.”
(ii) According to Austin:
:Custom is a rule of conduct which the governed observed spontaneously and not in pursuance of law set
by political superior.”
(iii) According to Holland:
“Custom is .a generally observed course of conduct.”
Custom are of two kinds:
I. Legal Custom
II. Conventional Custom
I. Legal Custom:
According to Salmond, a legal custom is one whose legal authority is absolute, one which in itself and
propria vigore possesses the force of law:
(i) Kinds of legal Custom:
Legal Custom is of the following kinds:
(a) General Custom
(b) Local Custom
(a) General Custom:
General customs are those which have force of law throughout the territory. The common law of England is
based upon general customs of the realm.
(a) Local Custom:
The local custom are those which operate have the force of law in a particular locality. The authority of a
local custom is higher than that of general custom.
II. Conventional Custom:
A Conventional custom is one whose authority is conditional on its acceptance in the agreement between
the parties to be bound by it. There is a process by which conventional usage comes to have the force of
law. Conditions to treat usage as custom:

Difference between Customs and Law.

1. Law is a make; custom is a growth. Law is explicitly and deliberately made by the definite power
of the state, whereas custom “is a group of procedure that has gradually emerged, without
express enactment, without any constituted authority to declare it; to apply it and to safeguard
it.” Custom emerges spontaneously without any guide or direction. Law is consciously created
and put into force at the moment of its enactment. In other words, law is a make, custom is a
growth.
2. Law needs a special agency for enforcement, custom does not. Law is applied by a special
agency and is sanctioned by organized coercive authority. Custom does not need any special
agency for its application it is enforced by spontaneous social action. No physical penalty visits
a violator of custom; whereas punishment is meted out to one who violates the law. The state
will not punish a child if it does not touch the feet of his parents in the morning.
3. Law is specific, customs are not. Law is specific, definite and clear. One can know what the laws
of the land are. But as Maine opined, it is only known by a privileged minority. Customs, on the
other hand, are not definite or clear. They are not codified in any single book so that it becomes
difficult to know all the customs of the land.
4. Law is more flexible and adaptable than custom. Law can readily adjust itself to changing
condition: whereas customs cannot be readily changed. Customs are relatively fixed and
permanent. In times of crisis a law can be immediately enacted to meet the emergency. A
sudden change cannot be brought about in custom.
5. Customs fade and disappear without formal abolition and without recognition by any authority,
but laws disappear only when abolished by a recognized authority. Just as formal enactment of
law is necessary for it to come into effect, so its formal abolition is necessary to stop its binding
influence.
6. Law is more idealistic than custom. Law tends to be more idealistic than customs. It is the
offspring of mind and directed to aims which are far above the actual practice of society,
custom is the product experience and mainly concerned with the daily routine of life. Law
reforms the customs and abolishes those which are out of tune with the changing conditions, for
example, the Hindu Code Bill seeks to reform and abolish many of the Hindu customs regarding
marriage, divorce and succession.
7. Law generally deals with matters which are vital to the life of society: whereas the subject
matter of custom is more ordinary and familiar. The customs we observe in addressing persons
of authority or taking our meals or celebrating our festivals do not rise above the commonplace;
but the laws passed for creating a national academy of Sangeet or Sahitya, establishing a
welfare state, abolishing Zamindari system; introducing Three Year Degree course, making the
joining of N.C.C. compulsory and nationalising the banks deeply affect the social structure.

2018: Q4: What is “Title”? Explain facts which “ Invest” and “Divest” Title.

2014: Q4: What is “Title”? Explain facts which “ Invest” and “Divest” Title.

Title in general terms a title to an asset relates both to a person's right to enjoyment of that asset and the 
means by which that right has accrued and by which it is evidenced. 
In terms of property
real property or personal property, which stands against the right of anyone else to claim the property. In r
eal property title is evidenced by a deed (or judgment of distribution from an estate) or other appropriate 
document recorded in the public records of the county.
In the law of Trademarks, the name of an item that may be used exclusively by an individual for identificati
on purposes to indicate the quality and origin of the item.
Investiture Facts or Title:
Investiture facts create rights. They are titles. But a right may be created de novo, i.e., it may have no
previous existence, or it may be created by transfer of an existing right. In the former case it is called
original and in the latter derivative. The catching of fish is an original title of the right of ownership, while
the purchase of them is a derivative title.
2. Divestiture Facts:
The facts that take away, or cause the loss of, rights, are termed divestiture facts. They may be extinctive
or alimentative. The former are those which divest a right by destroying it; the latter divest a right by
transferring it to some other owner.
The surrender of a lease to the lesser divests the rights of the lessee by destroying the lease and it is an
extinctive fact. When, however, the lease is transferred to some other person, it divests one owner of the
particular right and creates rights in another. Derivative titles and alicnative facts are merely the same
facts looked from a different point of view.

2018: Q5: Define the possession. Explain the modes of acquiring of possession.

2016: Q5: Explain the concept of possession.

2015: Q7: Write Note. I) Acquisition of possession.

Possession is one the most important concept in the whole range of legal history.
I. According To Salomnd:
“The possession of the material object is the continuing exercise of a claim to the exclusive use of it”
II. According To Pollock:
“In common speech, a man is said to possess or to be in possession of anything which he has the apparent
control or form the use of which he has the apparent power of excluding others.”

Modes Of Acquisition Of Possession

there are there modes of acquiring possession.
I. Taking
II. Delivery
III. Operation of the law
I. Taking:
Possession is acquired by taking with the requisite animus, and it is done without the consent of the
owner. It may be done in the following ways:
(i) Rightful taking of possession:
A shopkeeper is entitled to get some money from a customer and the shopkeeper takes possession of the
things of the customer. This is an example of the rightful taking of possession.
(ii) Wrongfully taking of possession:
If a thief steals something from an individual, his acquisition of possession is wrongful.
(iii) Original taking of possession:
If a person captures a wild animal which does not belong to anybody, the possession is called original.
II. Delivery:
Another way of acquisition of possession is by delivery. In this case, a thing is acquired with the consent
and co-operation of the previous possessor.
A. Kinds Of Delivery:
It is of two Kinds:
(i) Actual
(ii) Constructive
(i) Actual delivery:
In Actual delivery, the union of the corpus and animus is brought about for the first time in the transferee,
as a result of the delivery by the transferor. The transferor may or may not retain mediate possession
depending on the nature of the transaction

Constructive Delivery:
To salmond, constructive delivery is that which is not actual, that is to say there are no physical dealings
with the thing but mere change of animus intention possession is secured.

III. Operation Of Law:

The law removes goods from the control of one person to the control of another e. g., If a person dies, the
possession of his property is transferred to successors and legal representative.

2018: Q6: What are the precedents? Explain the kinds of precedents.

2014: Q6: What are the precedents? Explain the kinds of precedents.

Precedent is created by judicial decisions which may be given either by a supreme or a subordinate Court.
A judicial precedent is one precedents contains I itself a principle of law. Judicial precedents are an
important source of law. They have enjoyed high authority at all times and in all countries . the common
law of England has been built up the decisions of England judges. There are so many reasons why
precedents operates as an authoritative source of law and it also has many kinds according to its probative
force.
According To Prof .Osborn:
“Precedent is a judgment or decision of a Court of law cited as an authority for deciding a similar set of
facts.”
According To Prof. keeton:
“A judicial precedent in a judicial decision to which authority has in some measure been attached.”

Kinds Of Precedents:
Following are the different kinds of precedents:

(i) Authoritative precedents:

According to Salmond an authoritative precedent is one which judges must follow whether
they approver of it or not. These are the legal sources of law and establish law in pursuance
of definite rule of law which confers upon them that effect.

Kinds of Authoritative precedents:

(a) Absolute Authoritative precedents:
Absolute authoritative precedents are those which have to be followed by the judges even if they do not
approve of them.

(b) Conditional Authoritative precedents:

A conditional authoritative precedent is one which though ordinarily binding on the Court to which it is
cited, but is liable to be disregarded in certain circumstances.

(ii) Persuasive precedents:

A persuasive precedent is one which the judges are under no obligation to follow but which they will take
into consideration. It is a historical source of law and will be followed only if its reasoning is sound flawless.

II. Declaratory And Original Precedent:

(i) Declaratory precedent:
According to Salmond, a declaratory precedent is one which is merely the application of an already
existing rule of law. The rule is applied because it is already law.
(ii) Original Precedent:
An original precedent is one which creates and applies a new law. It is law for the future because it is now
applied. They along develop the law of the country.

2018: Q7: Write a Note. i) Imperative law and Civil law.

Imperative law

Imperative Or Austin’ s Theory Of Law:

Austin says that law is a command which obliges a person to a course of conduct. It is laiddown by a
political sovereign, and enforceable by a sanction.
3. Features Of Imperative Theory:
According to Austin, positive law has three main features:

I. Command:
The first features of law is that it is a type of command.
According to Austin:
Commands are expressions of desire given by superiors to inferiors.
(i) Laws are general commands:
There are commands which are not. Austin distinguishes law from other commands by their generality.
Laws are general commands, unlike commands given on parade grounds and obeyed there then troops.

II. Sovereign:
According to Austin, a sovereign is any person or body of persons, whom the bulk of a political society
habitually obeys and who does not himself habitually obeys some other persons or persons.
Characteristics of Sovereign:
(i) Source of Laws:
Sovereign is the source of law. Every law is set, by a sovereign persons or body of persons.
(ii) Source of Power:
Prof. Laski says that there are there implications of the definition of sovereignty given by Austin. The state
is a legal order in which there is a determinate authority acting as the ultimate source of power.
(iii) Indivisible Power:
The power of sovereign is indivisible. It cannot be divided. Accordingly to Austin, there can only be one
sovereign in the state. The totality of sovereign is vested in one person or a body of persons.
(iv) Habitual obedient by People:
The chief characteristic of sovereign lies in the power to exact habitual obedience from the bulk of the
member of the society.

III. Sanction:
The term sanction is derived from Roman Law. According to Salmond “Sanction is the instrument of
coercion by which any system of imperative law is enforced Physical force is the sanction applied by the
state in the administration.

Civil Law:

Sir Johr Salmond classified the civil law into two parts:
(a) General Law
(b) Special Law

I. General Law:
The general law of a country is its territorial law, the which applies to all person, things, act legal rules
which are taken judicial notice of the Courts whenever there is any occasion for their application.

(i) Shapes of General law:

General law is of three shapes :
(a) Statute law
(b) Equity
(c) Common law
(ii) Examples:
Examples of general law are the law of contract or the Pakistan penal Code.

II. Special Law:

That part of the law which has no general application throughout country, but which is also enforced by the
Courts is the special law. It consists of those legal rules which Court will not recognize of apply them as a
matter of course but which must be specially proved and brought notice of the Courts by the parties
interested in their recognition.
(i) Illustration:
The Court may not and ordinarily it does not Know, what a `particular custom is. The parties have to prove
such a custom if they rely upon.

Kinds Of Special Law:

Saimond refers to six kinds of special laws which falls outside the general law.
(i) Local law:
Local law is the law of the locality and not the general law of the country. It is of two types:
(a) Local customary law
(b) Enacted law
(a) Local Customary Law:
It is that law, which is derived form immemorial customs prevails in the particular locality of
the state.
(b) Enacted law:
It means such law proceeding form local legislative authorities.

(ii) The conflict of laws:

The conflict of laws is also known as Foreign law or private international law. Justice and expediency
require sometimes that the municipal Courts apply a rule of foreign law to determine the right and
liabilities of the litigants before it.

(iii) Conventional law:

Conventional law arises out of agreement between the parties who are subject to it e.g., rules of a club or
Articles of Association of Company.

(iv) Autonomic law:

By autonomic law is that species of law which has its source in various form of subordinate legislative
authority possessed by private persons and bodies of person. Such form of law is enforced in the Court but
it is not general application e.g., law of universities, railway companies etc.

v) Martial law:
Martial law is the law administered in the Courts maintained by military authorities. It is of three kinds:
(a) It is the law for the discipline and control of the army itself and is commonly knows as military law.
(b) The law by which the army governs in times governs times of war occupied territory, outside the realm.
(c) The law which in times of war or other emergency, the army governs the realm itself in derogation of
the civil law.

(vi) International law as administrated in prize Courts:

It is a special kind of law which is dealt by the prize Courts in the times of war. Prize law is that part of law
which regulates the practice of the capture of the ships and cargoes at sea in times of war. Prize law is the
branch of civil law. It has two characters.
(a) It is international law because it prevails between nations.
(b) It is civil law as it is administered in civil Courts.

(vii) Mercantile Customs:

Another kind of special law consist of the body of mercantile wage knows as the law merchant. The law
relating to Hundis derives its origin form mercantile customs.

2018: Q7: Write a Note: ii) Void and Voidable Agreement

Void And Voidable Agreement

The law relating to contracts is governed by The Contract Act , 1872. However the Contract Act does not
purport to codify the entire law relating to contracts, the Act also specifically preserves any usage or
custom of trade or any incident of any contract not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. The law of
contract confines itself to the enforcement of voluntarily created civil obligation. The law of contract is not
able to take care of the whole range of agreements, Many agreements remain outside the purview
because they do not fulfill the requirement of a contract.

A Contract is an agreement; an agreement is a promise and a promise is an accepted proposal. Thus,

every agreement is the result of a proposal from one side and its acceptance by the other.

An agreement is regarded as a contract when it is enforceable by law . Section 10 of the Act deals with the
conditions of enforceability , According to this section , an agreement is a contract if it is made for some
consideration , between parties who are competent to contract , with free consent and for a lawful object .

Void Agreement :-
Void Contract means that a contract does not exist at all. The law can not enforce any legal obligation to
either party especially the disappointed party because they are not entitled to any protective laws as far
as contracts are concerned. An agreement to carry out an illegal act is an example of a void contract or
void agreement. For example, a contract between drug dealers and buyers is a void contract simply
because the terms of the contract are illegal. In such a case, neither party can go to court to enforce the
contract.

As per Section 2(g) of The Contract Act , 1872 “An agreement not enforceable by law is said to be void”,
and as per Section 2(j) of The Act “A Contract which ceases to be enforceable by law becomes void when it
ceases to be enforceable”. 

Difference between Void and Voidable Agreement :-

A void contract is considered to be a legal contract that is invalid, even from the start of signing the
contract. On the other hand, a voidable contract is also a legal contract which is declared invalid by one of
the two parties, for certain legal reasons.
While a void contract becomes invalid at the time of its creation, a voidable contract only becomes invalid
if it is cancelled by one of the two parties who are engaged in the contract. In the case of a void contract,
no performance is possible, whereas it is possible in a voidable contract.
While a void contract is not valid at face value, a voidable contract is valid, but can be declared invalid at
any time.
While a void contract is nonexistent and cannot be upheld by any law, a voidable contract is an existing
contract, and is binding to at least one party involved in the contract.

2018: Q7: Write a Note: iii) Difference b/w Corporation and Firm.

2015: Q7: Write a Note: iii) Difference b/w Corporation and Firm.

The outstanding feature of a corporation is its independent corporate existence. A corporation is in law a
person. It is a distinct legal persona existing independent of its members. By fiction of law, a corporation is
a distinct entity, yet in reality it is an association of persons who are the beneficial owners of all the
corporate property so a corporation on its own is liable to its acts. A corporation is different from the firm
as the firm is not considered to be a legal person.

Definition Of Corporation:
A corporation is an artificial or fictitious person constituted by the personification of a group or a series of
individuals.

Meaning Of Firm:
A firm is the relation between the person who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by
all of them acting for all.

Difference Between Corporation And Firm:

Following are the differences between corporation and firm.
I. Legal Entity:
Corporation is a separate legal entity apart from its members. A firm does not have corporate personality,
so it is not a separate personality from its members.
II. Liability:
In corporation, liability of corporation and its members are different. In firm, partners are jointly liable.
III. Legal Status:
A corporation can sue and be sued. A firm cannot sue of its own name.
IV. Duration:
A corporation has a perpetual succession even if a member of it dies it continues. A firm has not perpetual
succession. A firm can be extinguished by the extinction of any of its two members.
V. Existence:
A corporation can exist even with one member. This is not possible in the case of partnership firm. There
must be more than one member of a partnership firm.
VI. Contract With Members:
It is possible for a corporation to enter into a contract with its members. No firm can enter into a contract
with its members.
VII. Rights And Duties:
A corporation can have rights and duties different from its members. This is not possible with the firm.
VIII. Possession Of Property:
A corporation can possess the property different from its members. The property of the firm is the property
of the members.
IX. Base Of Formation”
The base of corporation is voluntary. Base of formation of a firm is based on the maxim “Consensus Of
Idem”, which means consent of both the parties. If both the parties are consenter, they can from a firm.

2018: Q7: Write a Note: iv) Purpose of criminal justice

2015: Q7: Write a Note: iv) Purpose of criminal justice

Administration of criminal justice is dealt within criminal proceedings. The object of criminal justice is to
punish the wrong-doer. Form very ancient time, a number of theories have been give concerning the
purpose of punishment, which may be broadly divided into two classes. The view of one class is that the
end of criminal justice is to protect and add to the welfare of the state and society. The view of other class
is that the purpose of punishment is retribution.
I. Deterrent Theory:
According to this theory, the object of criminal justice in awarding punishment is to deter the people from
committing crimes again.
The purpose of the Criminal Justice System is to deliver justice for all, by convicting and punishing the
guilty and helping them to stop offending, while protecting the innocent.
The central objective of the Criminal Justice System is to deliver an efficient, effective, accountable and fair
justice process for the public.
Prisons should reduce crime in three principal ways: by incapacitating offenders, by punishing and thereby
deterring others who would commit crimes, and by rehabilitating offenders.
It was the American legal scholar Herbert Packer who first proposed that the competing logics of 'crime
control' and 'due process' exercised varying influence on the operations of the US criminal justice process.
Under the crime control model, the underlying logic of the criminal justice is to contain and repress
criminal behaviour. Successful criminal detection, prosecution and conviction are hallmarks of an effective
criminal justice model. The due process model, on the other hand, places at least as much emphasis on
protecting the rights of the innocent as it does on convicting the guilty. The protection of individual liberty
in the face of a potentially over-powerful state is a key preoccupation of the due process model.
But disputes between crime control and due process considerations tend also to boil down to questions of
degree and emphasis. Crime control advocates might argue that a misguided attachment to certain
protections historically afforded to suspects hampers convictions. But the principle of appropriate
protections is not, generally, denied. Due process advocates might champion enhanced protections for
suspects in police custody. But one would have to search hard to find someone who would oppose any
questioning of suspects in police custody.
The debate over the appropriate balance between due process protections and the crime control
imperative, in other words, tends to be dominated by disagreements of a largely procedural kind. Such
procedural debates are obviously vitally important. A society that shows indifference to the processes by
which those deemed to have breached the laws of the land are dealt with is unlikely to be a society in
which the rights of individuals are respected.

2017: Q2: Define transformation of question of facts into law and its effect on the evidence.

As more and more cases are decided, identical decisions are given by the judges in those cases which
have similar facts. Old case law is quoted in fresh cases so to a lesser extent, even question of fact are
converted into questions of law.
In a question of fact, it is the duty of the Court to weigh the evidence and then come to its conclusion.
As the legal system grows, there is a tendency to transform question of fact, into those of questions of law.
Even in questions of pure fact, there are already pre-determined and authoritative answers.
As we have already seen, in the primitive stage of society, the basis of decision was the sole discretion of
the judge, unfettered by any fixed rules or principles. With the advancement of society fixed principles or
formulae came to be evolved and the judge had to follow them but these principles being general and
vague left much room for the exercise of judicial discretion. Later, elaborate and all covering statues were
framed but these again due to their being expressed in language, which is an unruly horse and capable of
being interpreted in various ways, still left sufficient room for the judge to exercise his discretionary
powers.

The state of affairs exists even to this day. But with the development of society and growth of law, the
discretion of the courts is gradually being curtailed, firstly, by liberal enactment of statutes and secondly,
by previous judicial decisions and authoritative opinion. The developed legal system aims at exclusion of
the moral judgments of the courts and to compel them to decide cases, not according to their discretion,
but according to fixed principles. To achieve this end, decisions of superior courts are permanently
preserved in Law Reports and courts are bound to act according to the rules laid down therein. In this way,
what were formerly mere questions of discretion are converted, at a later stage, into questions of law.
Likewise, questions of fact may also at a later stage be converted into questions of law.

2017: Q3: Explain distinction b/w the Public law and Administrative law.

Public law is a generic term which denotes all laws that determine the legal relations between public
authorities and private individuals. Administrative law a species of public law that determines the powers,
duties and procedures of administrative authorities, including especially the law relating to judicial review
of administrative action.

Administrative law is a branch of public law. It regulates decision-making of units of public administration.
It also applies rule of law to the public administration. Administrative law deals with actions of government
and legal limitations of these actions.

Public law consists mainly of constitutional law, administrative law and criminal law. The definition of
public law was introduced for the first time by Roman jurist (lawyer) Ulpian, who was one of the greatest
legal authorities of the ancient Rome. According to Ulpian, public law is that, which concerns Roman state,
private law is concerned with the interests of citizens.

2017: Q4: Illuminate distinction b/w the law and Morals as well as relationship b/w law and
Morals.

This difference between law and morality may be put in a tabular form as follows:

Law Morality

1. Concerned with external acts of man and 1. Concerned with both the external acts and  

not motives. internal motives.

2. Is the concern of the state. 2. Is the concern of conscience.  

3. Is concerned with a part of man’s life. 3. Is concerned with the whole of man’s life.  

4. Violation of law is punishable by the 4. Its violation is not punishable by the state.  

state.

5. Force is the sanction behind laws. 5. Moral conscience is its sanction.  

6. Law is definite and precise. 6. Morality is vague and indefinite.  

7. Law is objective. 7. Morality is subjective.  

 8. Law acts within the territory of the state. 8. Morality is universal.  

9. Law is based on expediency. 9. Morality has absolute standards.  

10. A legal wrong may be morally right. 10. A moral wrong may be legally right.

11. There is a definite agency to enforce law. 11. There is no definite agency to enforce morality.  

The relationship between law and morals

Major breaches of a moral code are also likely to be against the law; criminal law provides the obvious
example of where morality and law often merge.
The influence of morality in a very general sense is also implicit in a wide range of different laws. For
instance, in the commercial world, laws criminalizing bribery and the imposition of legal duties on
company directors embody what would commonly be considered the ‘right’ or moral way to conduct
business. However, law is influenced by a wide range of political, social, economic and cultural factors, and
the moral climate of society is only one of these factors. In practice, many laws have a bureaucratic,
administrative and technical function. They operate as an essential part of a complex modern society and
have little or no connection with morality.
Moral values are not static, they evolve over time and laws may change as a consequence. For instance,
rape within marriage was criminalized in Scotland in 1989, reflecting the change in social and moral
attitudes to the role and status of women. It may be that law pre-empts the change of moral values; the
decriminalization of homosexuality, under the Sexual Offences Act 1967, is an often cited example of how
law influenced a change in this way.

2017: Q5: What is sources of law and sources of rights, explain.

2016: Q1: Define sources of Law and explain any one of the sources in deatil.

2014: Q3: Define sources of law and explain the “Formal” and “Material” sources of law.

Primary sources of law are constitutions, statutes, regulations, and cases. Lawmaking powers are divided
among three branches of government: executive; legislative; and judicial. These three branches of
government, whether federal or state, create primary sources of law.

 The executive branch creates administrative law, which is published as regulations or executive orders and
directives.
 The President of the United States makes executive orders and directives.
 Administrative agencies of the government (for example, the Environmental Protection Agency or
EPA) makes rules and regulations.
 The legislative branch creates laws ("statutes") that are passed and published as statutes.
 The judicial branch creates law in the form of decisions, also called "opinions" and "cases," that are
published in case reporters. 
 Judges create and shape the "common law."
 In a common law system, the law is expressed in an evolving body of doctrine determined by judges
in specific cases, rather than in a group of prescribed abstract principles.
 The common law grows and changes over time. 
 An important element of common law is stare decisis, which means that courts are bound to follow
earlier decisions ("precedents").

Secondary sources are plain-language writings about the primary sources of law, and they are a great
place to start research on any legal topic. They are not law and they are not binding on any court.
  They organize and explain the primary law to make it more accessible and understandable.
 Use secondary sources, like treatises, practice guides, legal encyclopedias, and law journal articles, to help you
find and understand the primary law, and to point you to the important statutes and cases that you can rely on
when writing briefs, and memoranda.
 Secondary sources, especially law journals, may influence lawmaking.
 Rights are human instruments, in law and ethics.
 Where do they come from?
 Well, they come from human beings’ need to control themselves and others, and from our expressions,
judgments, claims, counter-claims, etc. But that isn’t the whole of the story, for just “being an instrument” of
purpose and need does not mean that the instrument in question cannot be abandoned, or that all instruments
are created equal.
 There is something about the inherent concept of a right that disallows many common conceptions.
Philosophers and jurists and politicians have been working on the ideas for centuries or longer, but I am going to
skip most of that. Suffice it to say that the rightness of a right, so to speak, is not its instrumentality alone.
 But let us not forget what a right is, sans its utility, goodness, or justification — let us remember what even
an unacceptable right would be.
 A right is a claim to obligatory treatment. For every right there is at least one obligation — so understanding a
right requires understanding obligation, or duty.

Ultimately, what makes something a right are humans. A right in the sense of what you are talking about is
"a moral or legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way." In my opinion,
morality is something that was created by humans, and legality is definitely something created by
humans. Therefore, the two defining factors that make something a right are both created by humans,
which means that humans decide what are rights.

1. Formal sources
The sources from which the law derives its source and validity are formal sources of law. These associates
to the shape or system that causes the rules applicable formally. Here, we accept the rules as valid and
binding in the legal system. Example: The manifested will of statutes and judicial decision. Hence, the
formal sources of law include:

a. Will of the state: Sometimes for the benefits of the people the state makes its own laws on the subjects
which are provided in the state list under the 7th Schedule, with due process of law manifested in
our constitution.

b. Will of the people: Laws are also made by the will of the people sometimes on facing certain problems
though it has to be considered acknowledgeable by the state. Then the state makes it in the form of law.

c. Judicial decision of the court: In this case sometimes judgments of some lordships with immense value
are treated and transferred into a law.

Material source of law is the a place where the law material is taken. Material source of law is a factor that
helps the formation of the law, for example, social relations, political power relations, socio-economic
situation, tradition or religious views, the results of scientific research, international development, and
geographical circumstances.

Sources of law in the material definition are the factors or facts that determine the content of the law. Law
content is determined by two factors, idiil factors and social factors. Idiil factor is a factor that is based on
the community sense of justice, while social factor is reflected in the form of economic structure, customs,
legal system of other countries, religion and morality and legal awareness.

2017: Q6: What is the meaning of legislation as source of law and its effect on supreme and
sub-ordinate legislation?
2015: Q2: What is legislation? Explain the kinds of legislation.

The term legislation is derived from Latin words “legis” meaning law and “latum” meaning “to make”.
Legislation means the making or setting of law. In wider sense, the term legislation is used to include all
methods of law-making but in a restricted sense, it includes every expression of the legislation whether
the same is directed to the making of law or not.
The law that has its source in legislation is called enacted law, statute law or written law.
I. According To Salmoned:
“Legislation is that source of law which consists in the declaration of legal rules by the competent
authority.”
II. According To Gray:
“Legislation means the formal utterance of the legislative organs of the society.”
III. According To Holland:
“The making of general orders by our judges is as true legislation as is carried on by the crown.”

Legislation As Source Of Law:

Legislation as a source of law many be discussed by analyzing the following approach.
I. Analytical Approach:
The view of the analytical school is that typical law is a statute and legislation is the normal process of law
making. They neither approve of the usurpation of the legislative functions by the judiciary, nor considered
custom as a source of law.
II. Historical Approach:
The view of the Historical school is that legislation is the least creative of the sources of law. It has no
independent creative role at all. Its only legitimate purpose is to give better from and made more effective
the custom.

I. Supreme Legislation:
Supreme legislation is that which proceed from sovereign power in the state. It cannot be repealed,
annulled or controlled by any other legislative authority.
According to Austinian Theory:
It is logically impossible for there to be any legal limitations on the sovereign authority. Sovereign on
Austin’ s definition owes obedience to on one.

II. Subordinate Legislation:

Subordinate legislation is that which proceed from any authority other than the sovereign power and is
therefore dependant for its continued existence and validity on some superior authority.
Kinds Of Subordinate Legislation:
Salmond mentions five chief forms of subordinate legislation.
(i) Colonial legislation:
The laws made by the colonies and other dependencies of crown subject to the control of imperial
parliament.
(ii) Executive legislation:
The laws made by the executive body in order to regulate the administrative functions of the state.
(iii) Judicial legislation:
The superior Court are given limited powers to make general rules for the regulation of their own
procedure.
(iv) Municipal legislation:
Municipal authorities are also allowed to make bye-laws for limited purpose within their areas. These are
binding upon the people generally and offences against these by-laws are punishable.
v) Autonomous Legislation:
These are the formal utterances of private persons or groups of them who are given a limited legislation
authority to make laws touching matters which concerns themselves e. g, laws made by universities etc.
2016: Q2: Discuss in detail the classification of laws.

Classifications of Law:
Law may be classified in various different ways but the most important classifications are as follows:

Public law:
Public law is the law that is concerned with the relationship of the citizens and the state. This consists
other different specialist areas as follows:

Constitutional law:
Constitutional law is concerned with the constitution. It covers within its twenty five parts and twenty
schedules the composition and procedures of Parliament, the functioning of central and local government,
citizenship and the fundamental rights and liabilities of the citizens of the country.

Administrative law:
Administrative law is the law that is brought to for better and convenient administration of the government
and the government bodies. A huge number of disputes arise out of the administration of different
schemes and a body of law has been developed to deal with the problems of such persons against the
decision of administrative agency.

Private law:
Private law is the law that is predominantly concerned with the rights and liabilities of individuals towards
each other. The involvement of the states in this area of law is restricted to providing a proper method of
resolving the dispute which has arisen. Private law is also known as ‘civil law’ and often it is in contrast
with criminal laws.

Criminal law and civil law:

Legal laws are classified usually into two different types: criminal and civil law. It is important to note here
that the nature of this classification is because there are major differences in the purpose, procedures and
terminology of every branch of law.
Criminal law:
Criminal law is the law that is connected with the act of forbidding particular forms of wrongful conduct
and imposing punishment on those who engage in such acts. Criminal proceedings are usually brought in
the name of the State and are known as ‘prosecutions’. It should be noted that prosecutions may be
assessed by a private individual or other bodies, such as the trading standards department of the local
authority but cannot undertake the case of the prosecution.
Civil law:
The civil law deals with the private rights and duties which arise between individuals in a country. The
object of a civil action is to correct the wrongdoing that has been committed. Enforcement of civil law is
the accountability of the individual who has committed the wrong and the state is responsible to provide
for the procedure to resolve the dispute.

Substantive and Procedural Law: 

The law which defines rights and liabilities is known as substantive law. It is called so since it lays down a
proper and precise substance of subject matter which is enforceable in the courts. The purpose of a law
that is substantive is to define, create or confer a proper substantive legal right or status or to impose the
nature and extent of any sort of legal duties or obligations.
The law of procedure is that branch of law that deals with the process of litigation. It embodies the rules
and procedures pertaining to the institution and prosecution of any kind of civil or criminal proceeding.
Procedural law consists of a set of rules by which a court hears cases and decides the proceedings.

Municipal Law and International Law: 

Municipal or Domestic law is that facet of law that springs from and has an effect on the members of a
particular state. On the other hand, International law is the law that governs laws between different
countries. It regulates the relationship between various independent countries and is usually governed by
treaties, international customs and so on.

Common law and equity:

Law may further be classified as per the nature as to whether they form part of the common law or equity.
The distinction between the systems of common law and equity rises from far long in history and could be
understood properly by an examination of the origins of English law. The common law is the law followed
and gained by the Crown of England.

2016: Q3: Briefly describe the Sociological School of Law.

In early time, rules and laws are originated from the only custom to govern the society which had only a
social sanction. Then, the supremacy of King and priest came. then, after the revolution and changes, the
balance between the individual interest and welfare of society was realized.  
The Sociological school of Jurisprudence advocates that the Law and society are related to each other. This
school argues that the law is a social phenomenon because it has a major impact on society.
The idea of Sociological School is to establish a relation between the Law and society. This school laid
more emphasis on the legal perspective of every problem and every change that take place in society. Law
is a social phenomenon and law has some direct or indirect relation to society. Sociological School of
Jurisprudence focuses on balancing the welfare of state and individual was realized.
Sociology of law studies sociology from the legal point of view. Sociology of law is a recent field of inquiry. 
The Sociology of law is the interdisciplinary approach or sub-discipline of sociology. It views the society
from the legal side. And explains the interdependence of Society and law. Sociology law explains the
interdependence of the law and society. Podgorecki has listed the following functions of the sociology of
law:
 The sociology of law aims at grasping law in its working;
 it is to provide expert advice for social engineering;
 the sociology of law makes an attempt to shape its studies so as to make them useful for practical applications;
and
 the sociology of law struggles with reality.

Thus, the sociology of law aims at the understanding of legal and social phenomena, whereas the main
concern of the traditional approach to jurisprudence is to undertake analytical-linguistic studies.

Laissez-Faire is the most important reason for the creation of the sociological school of jurisprudence. It
refers to the policy of minimum governmental interference when it comes to dealing with the economy,
the society or the individuals.
It is due to the increasing importance of the practice of Laissez-Faire that this law rose to existence.
However, due to the development and growth of laissez-faire, there seems to be a greater relevance and
focus on individual growth. Therefore, the sociological school of jurisprudence emphasizes on individual
betterment, rather than:
 state interest
 general interest
 welfare of the state

In other words, this school of law came out as an outcome, result or reaction of the laissez-faire. This law is
here to help ensure strike a balance between – 1. individual interest and 2. general state welfare.

2016: Q4: Define merits and demerits of Precedents.

Advantages of Judicial Precedent

1. Judicial precedent offers the legal system access to consistency and predictability.
The goal of any justice system should be to create a level of legal fairness throughout society.
Because of the presence of judicial precedent in global legal systems, lawyers are able to advise their clients with some certainty as to
the position that they should take in their situation, and whether it is beneficial to take such a problem to the court system.
2. It also offers the judicial system a certain measure of flexibility.
Judicial precedent may create a standard that applies to similar cases and situations, but it is not a binding result. Higher courts do
mandate that lower ones follow rules to the letter, but then they reserve the right to change their mind when an appeal occurs or issues
in society change.

3. There is always the potential in place to set a new precedent.

If a legal case is being heard for the first time in history, then whatever outcome occurs will set a judicial precedent for any upcoming
issues that have similar circumstances. New situations arise all of the time in society, and they are not always covered by statutory
rules or previous decisions. This concept in legal systems makes it possible for a judge to consider past similar cases that are not 100%
exact or even take issues from other countries to make a ruling based on the available information.

4. Judicial precedent helps the court system to save time on future rulings.
When the legal system has already provided an answer for a similar situation, then the past rulings can become the foundation of the
current decision that is necessary for case resolution. That means judges can spend less time in deliberation because they already have
access to the decision-making processes of others. This process makes it possible to come to a recent outcome that is fast and fair for
all parties involved.

5. It creates a system which focuses on fairness.

We need judges to follow judicial precedent because when the law is consistent, then it gives future victims a chance for protection.
Although the family is filing a civil lawsuit in this matter, receiving money is not the same thing as receiving justice.

6. The structure of judicial precedent works to prevent mistakes from occurring.

When there is an unusual ruling, the general population understands that such an outcome is a mistake made by the system. Because
we create a structure which provides consistency that everyone can follow, there are fewer mistakes that happen when everyone stays
on the same page. This advantage should not be confused with minimum mandatory sentences, because the goal of a justice system
should be to make right in the best way possible what was made wrong.

7. Judicial precedent reduces the likelihood of a successful appeal.

When a judge follows the existing judicial precedent, then it gives the outcome of the case a stronger foundation for future appeals as
well. Because the ruling given follows the same thought processes of previous cases with similar circumstances, the higher courts are
more likely to allow the original willing to stand. This advantage is possible because the case laws which govern the decision-making
process for the current judge are treated as a rightful interpretation of what the original statutes were meant to convey.

List of the Disadvantages of Judicial Precedent

1. Judicial precedent adds multiple layers of complexity to the legal system.
Every ruling from every court creates the possibility of setting a judicial precedent. That means a case that starts in state court, and
then moves to the federal system, could generate up to six different potential precedents for future situations.
The complexity does not stop there. When there is a judgment from an appeals court in the United States, then it may contain between
3 to 5 separate judgments that differ from one another. You can even find situations where the Supreme Court of a state or the country
has each judge issuing their own perspective on a matter to create even more precedents. Judgments can be exceptionally long, and it
is for the future of lawyers and judges in these cases to work out what is applicable and what is not.

2. People may not agree on what the judicial precedent actually is in a case.
Even when a judicial precedent set a clear line on the expectations involved in a case for future consideration, there is no guarantee
that another judge will see the law in the same light. There can be differing opinions on what the actual purpose of a ruling happens to
be, creating a measure of uncertainty that can never be resolved until the next ruling is issued. Once that occurs, another charge can
step in and interpret for the situation in a third way.

3. Every case must face uncertainty until a final ruling is made.

Because our court system is not bound by any previous rulings in a current case (unless it is a lower court ruling on what a higher
court decided already), the results of any given situation will remain uncertain until the final ruling or appeal judgment is made. There
are some judges who are more than willing to depart from a precedent because they wish to do what is right for the individuals
involved in the case they are hearing. Then there are others who treat judicial precedent as it is it is part of the laws passed by the
legislature, unwilling to depart from it to make changes in the law.

4. Judicial precedents create rigidity in systems that sometimes need flexibility.

The rules which are created from judicial precedents can remain in place for a significant amount of time. It is not unusual for these
written or unwritten rules to apply even when they are outdated. Many judges will not make any changes to the perspective of the law
until a case comes through which requires such an action. Some changes require a case to come to a higher appeals court before new
rules can come about because of this system.
5. It forces the justice system to look backwards instead of looking toward the future.
A judicial precedent must always be looking backwards for it to create a standard in the first place. If someone finds themselves
violating a rule based on what a judge has ordered in the past, that it creates an unfair system of justice because the offense comes
from the judgment instead of legislation.

6. This process can introduce unnecessary restrictions into the law.

Judges can rule on specific cases in ways that a legislative body would never anticipate. If such a situation occurs, then the process of
judicial precedent can introduce unnecessary restrictions into the law. Although it is necessary for legal systems to stay up-to-date
with the changing circumstances in society, this disadvantage often makes it difficult, if not impossible, for judges to develop the legal
doctrine that is necessary to provide a justifiable outcome. Instead of looking at the present circumstances of a case, this philosophy
can cause judges to rely on previous decisions which may not apply under the current circumstances.

7. Judicial precedents can create more applicable decisions for a case than is necessary.
One of the significant disadvantages of judicial precedent is that the total volume of cases which exist in the law may result in too
many of them being available to consider. This issue can cause confusion because attorneys on both sides could potentially offer a
precedent from case law that justifies their position to the court. It would then be up to the judge to determine which side has firmer
ground to stand on when making their arguments in an adversarial system.

8. Some judges might look for reasons why the judicial precedent shouldn’t be followed.
There are times when a judge gets so frustrated with the circumstances in society or the legal system in general that they look for ways
to get around the judicial precedent that is in place. You can tell when this issue occurs in the court because the decision or ruling
which is rendered seems illogical. When the doctrine is not enforced as intended, then there can be dangerous consequences to such an
action. Overruling previous cases to set a new precedent can do more than spark outrage. It could potentially set aside convictions or
verdicts.

9. Outside rules can change how the doctrine of judicial precedent applies.
Since the Human Rights Act of 1998, the doctrine of judicial precedent has seen significant weakening because of the way that
principles and rules must now apply. They must be read in such a way that they are compatible with whatever rights are contained in
the European Convention of 1951, which means amendments are necessary to change any issues which may create a conflict. This
outcome makes it possible for the lower courts to overturn higher court rulings because of the outside legislation mandating domestic
change.

2016: Q7: Write a Note: i) Civil and Criminal Justice.

Criminal Justice System: 

In the criminal justice system, the crime victim reports a crime to law enforcement who may investigate. If an arrest is made following
an investigation, and there is sufficient evidence to go forward, a prosecutor files charges against defendant and pursues prosecution.
The act that caused the harm is known as a “crime” in the criminal justice system. Today the criminal justice system perceives crime
to be committed against the state. This perception explains a lot about why the system works as it does. In the criminal case, the
prosecutor is the attorney for all of the people of the state/jurisdiction, and does not act on behalf of the individual victim. The
prosecutor controls all key decisions of the case, including whether to charge a defendant with a crime and what crime to charge, and
whether to offer or accept a plea deal or go to trial. The penalties imposed if the defendant is found guilty can include
incarceration/imprisonment, fines and forfeitures, probation, community services, and sometimes restitution to the individual victim.
The burden of proof in criminal matters is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which is much more difficult to achieve than the
“preponderance of evidence” standard used in most civil cases.

Civil Justice System: 

Regardless of whether a criminal prosecution was undertaken, or whether defendant was found not guilty, crime victims may still be
able to seek justice by filing a civil lawsuit against the person or persons the victim believes caused the victim harm. The civil justice
system does not determine an offender’s guilt or innocence, but works to determine whether the offender is liable for the harm caused
to the victim. In pursuing the civil lawsuit, the victim, who usually hires a private attorney, controls all of the key decisions of the
case, including whether to accept a settlement offer or go to trial. The act that caused the harm is known as a “tort” in the civil justice
system. In the civil case, the victim is seeking to be compensated (usually with money) for the damages that he or she suffered as a
result of defendant’s tort. The amount of evidence needed to win in most civil cases (or what is known as the burden of proof) is a
“preponderance of evidence.” This burden of proof essentially means that one side’s evidence must be more persuasive than the other;
this is far lower than the burden necessary in a criminal case. Statutes, known as “statutes of limitation,” set time limits on how long
you have to file a civil suit following the harm you suffer. These time limits vary from state to state. If a lawsuit is filed after
expiration of the statute of limitations it will be dismissed as time-barred.
2016: Q7: Write a Note: ii) Legal rights

2015: Q4: What are the legal Rights? Explain the kinds of Legal Rights.

There can be on duty without a right and According to Hibbert “a right is one person’ capacity of obliging
others to do or forbear by means not of his own strength but by the strength of a third party. If such third
parts is God, the right is Divine. If such third parts is the public generally acting though opinion, the right is
moral. If such third parts is the stale acting directly or indirectly, the right is legal.”
The term legal right has been used in two senses:
I. Restricted Or Popular Sense:
(i) According to Gray:
“A legal is that powers which a man has to take a person or person do or refrain form doing a certain act or
certain acts, so far as the power arises form society imposing a legal duty upon a person or persons.”
II. Wider Sense:
In a wide sense, legal right include any legally recognized interest whether it corresponds to a legal duty or
not. It is an addition or benefit conferred upon a person by a rule of law.

Kinds Of Legal Rights:

Following are the kinds of legal rights:

I. Perfect And Imperfect Rights:

(i) Perfect right:

According to salmond, a perfect right is one which corresponds to a perfect duty I .e., which is enforced by
law.

(ii) Imperfect right:

An imperfect right is that which is recognized by law but cannot be enforced by law due to some
impediment. These may be turn into perfect rights.

III. Real And Personal Rights:

(i) Real right:
According to salmond, a real right corresponds to a duty imposed upon persons in general. It available
against whole word. Real rights are generally a negative rights as the duties which can be expected form
the whole world are of a negative character.

(ii) Personal right:

A personal right corresponds to a duty imposed upon determinate individuals. It against a particular
person. Personal rights are generally positive right as it imposes a duty on a particular person to do
something.
IV. Rights In Rem And Rights In Personam:
(i) Rights in Rem:
It is derived form the Roman term action in Rem” . It is available the whole world Examples are rights of
ownership and possession. My right of possession and ownership is protected by law against all those who
those may interfere with the same.
(ii) Rights in Personam:
It is derived form the Roman term “ action in personam,” Right in personam corresponds to duty imposed
upon determinate persons.

V. Proprietary And Personal Rights:

(i) Proprietary Right:
The proprietary rights of a person include his estate, his assets and his property in many forms. They have
some economic or monetary value. They possess both judicial and economic importance.
(ii) Personal right:
Personal right pertain to man, s status or standing in the law. They promote the man, well being. Personal
rights possess merely judicial importance.

VI. Inheritable And Uninheritable Rights:

(i) Inheritable Rights:
Inheritable rights are those which survives its owners.
(ii) Uninheritable right:
A right is uninheritable if it dies with its owners e. g. personal rights die with its owner and cannot be
inherit.

VII. Legal And Equitable Rights:

(i) Legal And Equitable Rights:
Legal rights are those which were recognized by common Law Court e. g., right to vote etc.
(ii) Equitable Rights:
Equitable rights are those which were recognized by the Court of chancery.

VIII. Primary And Secondary Rights:

(i) Primary Rights:
Primary rights are also called antecedent, sanctioned or enjoyment rights. These are those rights which
are independent of a wrong having been committed. They exist for own sake.
(ii) Secondary Rights:
Secondary rights are also called sanctioning, restitutory or remedial rights. Secondary rights are a part of
the machinery provided by the state of the redress of injury done to the primary rights. Their necessity
arises on account of the fact that primary rights are very often violated by the persons.

IX. Public And Private Rights: Public rights:

(i) Public rights:
A public right is possessed by every member of the public. It is between a state and the private individual
e. g. , right to vote etc.
(ii) Private right:
A private right is concerned only with the individuals. Both the parties connected with the right are private
persons e.g., contract entered into by two individuals.

2016: Q7: Write a Note: iv) Ownership

2015: Q6: Define the ownership. Explain the kinds of ownership.

The concept of ownership is one of the fundamental justice concepts common to all system of law. This
concept began to grow when people started plating trees, cultivating lands and building their homes. They
began to think in term of “Mine” and “Thire”. The idea ownership following the idea of possession.
According to Keeton:
The right of ownership is a conception clearly easy to understand but difficult to define with exactitude
there are two main theories with regard to the idea of ownership. The great exponents of two views are
“Austin” and “Salmond”.
I. Austin’s View Of Ownership:
According to Austin ownership means a right which avails everyone who is subject to the law conferring
the right to put thing to user of indefinite nature.”

Kinds Of Ownership:
Following are the different kinds of ownership:

I. Corporeal And Incorporeal:

(i) Corporeal:
Corporeal ownership is the ownership of a material object. It is connected with the corporeal things.
Corporeal things are those which can be perceived and felt by the senses e. g., ownership of a house, car
etc. is corporeal ownership.
(ii) Incorporeal:
Incorporeal ownership is the ownership of a right. It is connected with the incorporeal things are those
which cannot be perceived by the senses and which are intangible. Incorporeal ownership includes
ownership over intellectual objects and encumbrances e. g., ownership of a copy right or trademark etc. is
incorporeal ownership.

II. Trust And Beneficial Ownership:

(i) Trust ownership:
Trust ownership is an instance of duplicate ownership. Trust property is that which is owned by two person
at the some time. The ownership is only a matter of from and not real. His ownership is only a matter of
from and not of substance.
(ii) Beneficial ownership:
In a trust, the relationship between the two owner is such that one of them is under an obligation to use
ownership for the benefit of other. That other person for whose benefit the ownership of the formed is used
is called the beneficial ownership.

III. Legal And Equitable Ownership:

(i) Legal ownership:
It is that which has its origin in the rules of common law and legal owner is one who is recognized as owner
by common law.
(ii) Equitable ownership:
It is that which proceeds from the rules of equity. In many cases equity recognize ownership where law
does not recognize owing to some legal defect. Equitable ownership always implied legal ownership.

IV. Vested And Contingent Ownership:

(i) Vested ownership:
When the title of the owner is perfect. It is called vested ownership. The word vested is used in two senses:
(a) The right may be vested in possession e. g., property is given to ‘A’ for life. His interest is vested in
possession.
(b) The right may be vested in interest.
(ii) Contingent ownership:
When the title of the ownership is yet imperfect but is capable of becoming perfect on the fulfillment of
some condition, it is called contingent ownership.

2015: Q3: What is the necessity of Administration of Justice? Explain the functions of the court
of law.

“Administration of Justice is the firmest pillar of the Government. It is sovereign and cannot be violated
with impunity.” (George Washington). The most essential functions of a state are primarily two, war and
administration of justice. If
a state is not capable of performing either or both of these functions, it cannot be called a state. The most
important and primary purpose of law is to achieve justice and justice can be achieved through
administration. In primitive times might was the sole right. Every man was his own judge. A person
wronged would seek revenge by his own hands. To stop this loot it appears necessary that some strong
tribunal should hold administration and now a state perform this function.
According to Jeremy Taylor:
“A herd of wolves is quieter and more at one than. So many men, unless they all have one reason in them
or have one power over them.”
According to Hobbes:
“Without a common power to keep them all in awe, it is not possible for individuals to live in society.”

I. Meaning Of Administration Of Justice:

(i) According to prof. Salmond:
“The administration of justice implies the maintenance of right within a political community by means of
the physical force of the state.”
(ii) According to George Washington:
“Administration of justice is the firmest pillar of Govt. Law exists to bind together the community. It is
sovereign and cannot be violated with impurity.

The functions of Court of law may be classified into two categories.

I. Primary Functions
II. Secondary Functions

Primary Functions:
The primary function of Court of law is the administration of Justice.
Administration of justice is divided into two parts.
(i) Administration of Civil Justice:
Administration of Civil Justice is death with civil proceedings. The object of civil justice is to enforce rights.

(ii) Administration of Criminal Justice:

Administration of criminal justice is dealt within criminal proceedings. The object of criminal justice is to
punish the wrong-doer. Form very ancient time, a number of theories have been give concerning the
purpose of theories have been given concerning the purpose of punishment, which may be broadly divided
into two classes. The view of one class is that the end of criminal justice is to protect and add to the
welfare of the state and society. The view of other class is that the purpose of punishment is retribution.

Secondary Functions:
Courts are primarily established to perform the essential or primary functions, but once they established,
they are also to perfrom secondary functions. These are miscellaneous and indeterminate in character and
number and tend to increase with the advancing complexity of modern civilization.
2015: Q7: Write a note. ii) Analytical Jurisprudence.

Analytical Jurisprudence:
Analytical jurisprudence deals with the analysis of basic principles of law. It is not concerned with the past
stages of its evolution. It is also not concerned with its goodness or badness. The purpose is to analyze and
dissect the law of the land as it exists today.
(i) Jurists Related with Analytical School:
Jeremy bentham was the real founder of the English Analytical School. Later on Austin took over the
analytical method. Other chief exponents are Sir William Markby. Amos, Holland, Salmond and prof. Hart.
(ii) Scope of Analytical Jurisprudence:
According to salmond, scope of analytical Jurisprudence lies as follows:
(i) Analysis of the concept of law.
(ii) An examination of the relation between civil law and other forms of law.
(iii) An analysis of the ideas of state, sovereignty and administration of justice.
(iv) Study of sources of law.
(v) Investigation of the theory of legislation, judicial precedents and customary law.
(vi) An inquiry into the scientific arrangement of law into distinct departments along with an analysis of
distinctions on which the division is based.
(vii) An analysis of the concept of legal right.
(viii) An investigation of the theory of legal liability in civil and criminal cases.
(ix) An examination of other relevant legal concepts.
(iii) Importance of Analytical Jurisprudence:
The analytical jurisprudence brought about precision in legal thinking. It provided us with clear, definite
and scientific terminology. It deliberately excluded all external considerations which fall outside the scope
of law.

2014: Q5: Define nature of law and explain the classification nature of law.

What is the nature of law? This question has occupied center stage Jurisprudence and philosophy of law in the modern
era, and has been the central occupation of contemporary analytic Jurisprudence. This entry in the legal theory Lexicon
aims to give an overview of the “what is law” debate. Historically, the answer to the question, “what is Law” is thought
to have two competing answers. The classical answer is provided by natural law theory, which is frequently
characterized as asserting that there is an essential relationship between law and morality and Justice. The modern
answer is provided by legal positivism, which as developed by John Austin, asserted that law is the command of the
sovereign backed by the threat of punishment. Contemporary debates over the nature of law focus on a revised set of
positions legal positivism is represented by Analytical legal positivists, like H.L.A Hart Joseph raza and Jules Coleman. The
natural law tradition is defined by John Punis and a new position, interpretivism is represented by the work of the late
Ronald Dworkin. In some ways, the title of this lexicon entry is misleading because of focus on the “what is law” question
as it has been approached by contemporary legal philosophers. There are other important perspectives on the nature of
law that focus on law’s functions rather than the meaning of the concept for criteria of legal validity. For example, the
sociological tradition includes important work on the nature of law by Max Weber and Niklas Lahumann. These issues
are discussed by Brian Tamanaha in a very clear way. This lexicon entry maps the territory of the “what is Law”?
Controversy, and provides introductory sketches of the major positions as always, the lexicon is written for law students.
Classification of Law
Notion of classification is very old. Classification was first made by Roman Jurists. The ancient Hindu Jurists also laid
down eighteen titles or heads of “Vyavahara” civil law. The distinguished civil and criminal law and classified crime law
under various heads. There are two limitations in classification of law first; any classification will have only a relative
value and no universal principle or rules can be laid down for it. With the onward march of time, old rule changed their
nature and the field of application and new rules based on different Principles come into existence. Therefore, a new
classification becomes necessary. Roman Jurist analyzed law in old times but that classification is Vague to present
world. Second, any classification made keeping in view the law of a Particular community or nation is not applicable to
the law of any other Community or nation. For Example; if one commits a breach of promise to marry, in English law, it
falls under contract, but in French law it falls under delict. So, it’s not possible to discuss the classifications given by
various Jurists, only a General Classification shall be given which has been adopted by most of Jurists of the modern
times.
Classification of Law (1) International Law, and (2) Municipal or National law International law:- The Present form of
international law is of recent origin some earlier Jurist were of the view that the international law is not law as it lacked
many elements which law should have. Austin and his supporters were of this view. Some says international law is law
and it is superior to the municipal law.

2014: Q7: Write a note: ii) Animus Possidendi.

An intention to possess (sometimes called animus possidendi) is the other component of possession. All that is required
is an intention to possess something for the time being. In common law countries, the intention to possess a thing is a
fact. Normally, it is proved by the acts of control and surrounding circumstances.

It is possible to intend to possess something without knowing that it exists. For example, if you intend to possess a
briefcase, then you intend to possess its contents, even though you do not know what it contains. It is important to
distinguish between the intention sufficient to obtain possession of a thing and the intention required to commit the
crime of possessing something illegally, such as firearms, banned drugs or stolen goods. The intention to exclude others
from the garage and its contents does not necessarily amount to the guilty mind of intending to possess stolen goods.

When people possess places to which the public has access, it may be difficult to know whether they intend to possess
everything within those places. In such circumstances, some people make it clear that they do not want possession of
the things brought there by the public. For example, it is not uncommon to see a sign above the coat rack in a restaurant
which disclaims responsibility for items left there.

2014: Q7: Write a note: iii) Causes which make agreement invalid.

A voidable contract is a valid contract that is binding to only one party; the other party may choose to either reject or
accept it.

A court or tribunal may rule a contract voidable under various circumstances, including:

 A party was coercing or threatening the other party into signing the agreement
 A party was under undue influence (one party dominated the will of another)
 Mistakes are present in the contract that affect whether one or both parties can carry out their obligations
 A party breaches the terms of the contract 
The party affected by the particular circumstance may choose to either set aside the contract or continue with it.

For instance, if you buy a brand-new vehicle from a car dealer and sign a Sales Agreement detailing the payment plan
and warranties and later discover that the dealer sold you a used car instead, you are the party affected by the mistake
and you can elect to void the contract. Alternately, you may decide that you got a good deal for the car and proceed
with the agreement anyway. 

2014: Q7: Write a note: iv) Perfect and imperfect Rights.

Perfect right
A perfect right is one, which corresponds to a perfect duty, and is not only recognized by law but also enforced by law.
Enforce ability is the general test of such a right. A Legal proceeding will lie for the breach of such a right. The courts of
law not only recognized perfect right but also enforce it, if necessary with the help the physical force of the state. The
right of a creditor to recover his dues from debtor within time is a perfect right. Besides the execution of a partition suit,
that is delivery of possession in favor of plaintiff right. If a family case is filed for dissolution of marriage and if the case is
decreed here dower and maintenance is not paid by defendant within stipulated time to recover this amount by the
court is once perfect right. In conclusion, it can be said all fundamental right are perfect right.

Imperfect right
An imperfect right is one which though recognized by law is not enforced by it. No legal proceeding will lie with regard to
such a right. Example of such legal right are time-barred debt or claims, Barred by laps of time claims unenforceable
legal action on account of absence of some strict legal requirement, such as the non registration of a document where
registration is compulsory and so on. In a time barred debt, the creditor cannot recover his dues not because the law of
limitation bars the remedy.

The Imperfect right are acceptation to the maxim “Ubijus ibi remedium” which means where there is a right there is a
remedy that is no right without any remedy.

The law will recognize imperfect rights for the following purposes, which are of greatest important, and of most general
application.
(a) An imperfect right may be as a ground of defense, though not as ground of action. In case of an unregistered
instrument if money is paid to seller. If it is a good depend for its recovery.
(b) An imperfect right may possess the capacity becoming perfect. An informal verbal contract may become enforceable
by action because of the fact that written evidence of it has since come in to existence in like manner, part payment or
acknowledgement will raise once more to the level to the perfect right, a debt that has been barred by laps of time.
Thus, a promise to pay a time barred debt will be enforced by the courts.