The Legal Experience Of Rome

THE LEGAL EXPERIENCE OF ROME

The book "The legal experience of Rome. Your projection on the threshold of the S.XXI ”was written by Ricardo Panero Gutiérrez and published in Valencia in 1998 by the Tirant Lo Blanch editorial. Its author was a professor and professor of Roman Law at the University of Barcelona.

Throughout this master lesson, it presents some indications about how Roman law was and how it has evolved. It exposes the great impact and importance that it had in what we currently consider as the right and that the references that we have today are known as Roman tradition, which is vitally important since it meant the basis of current law because it was oweda valid right for a more contemporary time.

It also gives us the reflection of the jurist Ángel Latorre when he explains that today’s jurists are limited to the practical application of law without trying to understand or promote changes that bring us closer to a more just society, which is very far from what it representsRoman law.

In my opinion, there are two key moments in the evolution of Roman law that is basically the set of legal norms by which Rome was governed throughout its history: the first is the creation of the Ius Civile in the archaic era (Until the first third of the S. IV a.C.), characterized by being austere, rigid and patriarchal, and the establishment of the Ius honorarium in the preclassic era (until the last third of the S. I), in which Roman society becomes cosmopolitan, to exalt the individual and establish new people’s rights and the second, is the change of paper of the jurists (lawyers, judges, magistrates .

..) since, inA beginning was an honorary position that citizens made without any preparation and without charging for it.

The author tells us about the Roman lawyer in generic terms and the education he received, who was pure theory and not an adaptation of it to practice with the cases that society raised, which little could contribute to Rome.

Then explains the conceptions of the jurist according to Ángel Latorre, who begins to see how necessary it is to share knowledge with different fields of science (economists, sociologists, psychologists, etc.) In order to help the State and society improve mutual relationships. But a good jurist must not only learn and apply lessons to real life, but to understand the right and help to be reformed to the extent of what is necessary to respond to the changes generated by society and this implies putting it into connection withSocial reality. Next, it refers to the legal experience of Rome on the threshold of the S. XXI analyzing those functions of the jurist who can contribute Roman law.

In the first place, as Schulz comments, to say that although Rome is the "people of law" by Antonomasia is not, instead, "the people of the law". Even so, his teaching shows us that a “structural” character always prevails against the “conjunctural”, but keeping in mind that a literal interpretation can enable the fraud of the law, with clear examples of laws in the XII Tables and the comicals.

On the other hand, Panero emphasizes that the origin of Roman law does not strictly come from written laws, but from customs of the people that prevailed verbally until their regulation and compilation in the XII Tables. With all this, comment in this case that first of all, the words are the weapon of any jurist.

The functionality of the times causes jurists to be increasingthat current law needs more jurists than legist and therefore it is necessary.

Finally, he says goodbye demonstrating with examples of past and current times how difficult it turns out to find "new" situations that are not precedents.

In conclusion, although the law has very marked origins and in the long history it has been used as a reference for the subject, it is necessary to know how it was developed in the past and, above all, you have to know how to use it currently knowing thepast and avoid the mistakes that were made and adapt to the present.