The Role of Language in Shaping Legal Interpretation: A Comparative Study of Common Law and Civil Law Systems

• Muhammad Abdullah

  Author

This article presents a comparative analysis of the role of legal language in shaping interpretive methodologies within Common Law and Civil Law systems. It argues that judicial interpretation is not a neutral, technical exercise but is profoundly conditioned by the structure, tradition, and inherent characteristics of the legal language itself. The study demonstrates that the Common Law tradition, rooted in precedent (stare decisis), naturally employs a language of meticulous specificity in its drafting, which fosters interpretive canons like textualism and the plain meaning rule. In contrast, the Civil Law tradition, built upon comprehensive codification, utilizes a language of broad principle, which logically necessitates a teleological approach focused on the spirit and systemic purpose of the law. The article further explores how these distinct linguistic foundations dictate the judge's role: the Common Law judge as a decoder of statutory text within a web of binding precedent, and the Civil Law judge as an applier of general codes guided by intent and coherence. While modern forces such as globalization, statutory proliferation, and the influence of supranational courts are identified as catalysts for a significant convergence of practices compelling Common Law judges to be more purposive and Civil Law judges to acknowledge jurisprudence constant the analysis concludes that deep-rooted linguistic and philosophical differences persist. The core DNA of each system, embedded in its unique relationship with language, continues to ensure that the paths to determining legal meaning remain distinct, preserving a vital diversity in global legal thought.

• pdf