English Literature REVIEW

1. Hamad khadam
English Legal System
PRIVATE LAW:
Private law regulates private interactions such contracts, torts (or "wrongs" in common law),
and responsibilities under the jus commune. . Public law controls state-citizen ties, whereas
private law rules private connections (Churchland, Patricia, 2011). Domitius Ulpianus, one of
Roman law's five great attorneys, distinguished public and private law; European and
continental legal philosophers and thinkers later classified legal disciplines this way. Public
and private law. Private law prioritizes individual rights, but public law protects Rome. Modern
thinker Charles-Louis Montesquieu clarified this distinction: Law of Nations, Public Law, and
Civil Law in his masterpiece: Because so many countries dwell on such a huge world, the "law
of nations," which governs international relations, is important. For clarity, we'll name the law
that governs ruler-subject relations "political law" because it applies to societies that must be
maintained. Civil law guides private parties' activities in addition to common law. Private law
regulates private interactions such contracts, torts (or "wrongs" in common law), and
responsibilities under the jus commune. Public law controls state-citizen ties, whereas private
law rules private connections (Churchland, Patricia, 2011). Domitius Ulpianus, one of Roman
law's five great attorneys, distinguished public and private law; European and continental legal
philosophers and thinkers later classified legal disciplines this way. Public and private law.
Private law prioritizes individual rights, but public law protects Rome. Modern thinker Charles-
Louis Montesquieu clarified this distinction: Law of Nations, Public Law, and Civil Law in his
masterpiece: Because so many countries dwell on such a huge world, the "law of nations,"
which governs international relations, is important. For clarity, we'll name the law that governs
ruler-subject relations "political law" because it applies to societies that must be maintained.
Civil law guides private parties' activities in addition to common law.
PUBLIC LAW:
Public law affects people's lives in immigration, health, the environment, and education. A
major purpose of public law is to describe the correct relationship between government and its
subjects. Public law also represents the state's exclusive power over the nation. It can formulate
and enforce all laws (Brink, David, 1997). This subject of law is also known as administrative
law and constitutional law (the laws that establish a nation). The state's influence over its people
makes public law crucial to protecting citizens' basic rights and liberties. To conclude, this area
of law monitors the government to ensure it does not violate citizens' rights and promotes just
and lawful authority usage.
CRIMINAL LAW:
Crimes are classified, suspects are caught, convicted, and punished, and ex-convicts are
rehabilitated under criminal law. Criminals are punished to keep the community safe. The
police use their regular authority, the legal system imposes consequences through tort lawsuits,
moral codes taught at home, school, and religious institutions, and business and government
agency policies are all sources of authority. Generally, a crime is a public trespass and a tort is
a private loss, however the distinction might be unclear.

2. Civil Law:
Continental or Romano-Germanic civil law governs 60% of the world. Canon law, based on
Roman law's concepts, categories, and norms, underpins these systems. Even as it becomes
increasingly secular and emphasizes individual freedom, civil law encourages teamwork. The
precise, narrow meaning of "civil law." refers to people, things, and their relationships, not
criminal, corporate, or employment law. Criminal court procedures include receiving notices
to appear in court or submit documents. The suspect may be apprehended, questioned, and
charged before being brought to court. A "defendant" is a person accused with a crime under
Criminal Procedure Rules.
Government prosecutors file formal charges against suspects. The Crown Prosecution Service
usually causes problems. Magistrates are criminal law's initial authority. If the accused pleads
guilty at the first hearing, the prosecution may drop all charges. Crown Courts should only hear
serious cases (Brink, David, 1997). Magistrate's court convicts may be sent to the Crown Court,
where they will face their punishment. One to three judges preside over most municipal court
matters. If needed, an attorney can help. Crown Court matters are heard by one judge. Evidence
and testimony are usually presented to a jury. Initial court sessions are often adjourned. The
court will schedule a trial if the defendant pleads not guilty. The judge will issue discovery
requests, schedule a trial date, and provide trial preparation instructions (called "directions") at
the first court hearing. Whether the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty, the court will review
all evidence and hear prosecution witnesses. Cross-examination allows the accused or his
attorney to question state witnesses. After hearing all prosecution evidence, the defence can
present its case and cross-examine government witnesses. In criminal proceedings, the
prosecution has the burden of proof. If the prosecution presents enough evidence, magistrates
or Crown Court jurors will convict. Crown Court or magistrates' court judges will determine
sentence. Jail time, restitution, community service, and other punishments are possible. The
High Court, Court of Appeal, Crown Court, and Court of Appeal follow the Criminal Procedure
Rules while assessing extradition challenges. Criminal Procedure Rules cover several aspects
of a trial. This page lets you quickly evaluate several regulations in one place. The "notes"
portion of each rule provides additional information and references to applicable laws and
regulations.
HIERARCHY:
MAGISTRATE'S COURT:
The magistrate hears all preliminary criminal cases. A judge may sit on a subordinate court or
a panel of judges. A Magistrate's Court is juror-free. The district judge decides guilt and
punishment. Keep in mind that judges have limits.
Crown Court:
If a case is severe, it may be transferred from the Magistrates' Court to the Crown Court.
Judicial power is unlimited. Assault, robbery, and murder are "indictable crimes." Crown court
juries decide guilt and judges sentence.

3. Civil Court Hierarchy:
County courts tend to hear most civil cases. Each court has specialized Enforcement Agents
who enforce and collect fees. District, circuit, or deputy district judges hear cases. Circuit
judges, the highest-ranking judges, have more power than district judges. District judges may
hear minor claims and fast track.
High Courts:
The Chancery, King's Bench, and Matrimonial divisions make up the three sections of the High
Court. Habeas corpus, judicial review, and civil cases—including conflicts involving
contracts—fall under the purview of the King's Bench. This court is an expansive state-level
judicial body that can handle cases that are considered too complex or expensive for a lower-
level county court. The Chancery and King's Bench were only able to administer justice inside
their respective jurisdictional limits. Cases involving guardianship, adoption, wardship, marital
acts, and noncontentious probate are handled by Family Court. There is a High Court District
Registry in every town in England and Wales, with the main one being kept at the Royal Court
of Justice in London. The Public Registry of Probate, a division of the High Court's Family
Division, exists in every county. The individuals working at this registry are in charge of
confirming the legitimacy of a will and designating a personal representative to manage the
estate of the departed. At the High Court, matters are usually presided over by a single judge.
Cases involving the publication of disparaging remarks and incidents of misconduct by police
enforcement are decided by juries. When county courts hold preliminary hearings—more
precisely, judges' hearings—instead of trials, the High Court acts as the appeal court.
COURT OF APPEAL:
The Court of Appeal handles appeals from clients whose cases were unsuccessful in lower
courts. The Royal Courts in London, specifically the Courts of Justice, are responsible for
handling legal appeals. In the standard method, a jury will comprise three judges. An appeal is
a formal request or petition made to a higher authority, seeking a specific action or decision.
Typically, the higher court, rather than the lower court, must be formally requested to consider
the matter. Appellate Court: The Court of Appeals is responsible for addressing matters of
certification and appeal, even if they are very insignificant. An appeal can only be granted by
the Assize Court/Appeal court if the petition meets stringent criteria. The Supreme Court,
which serves as the ultimate appellate court for cases involving legal issues, hears both criminal
and civil appeals. Typically, a panel of five justices from the judicial committees presides over
cases, however this number is subject to change. Prior to July 31, 2009, with the exception of
the House of Lords, the Supreme Court served as the ultimate venue for appeals. If you disagree
with your sentence from the Crown Court, you have the option to challenge it at the Court of
challenge (Criminal Division). The appellant is required to submit an Appeal Application
within 28 days after being sentenced. This application will serve as the basis for an appeal and
can potentially result in the reversal of the sentence. If your appeal is granted, the full Court of
Appeal will review whether your previous sentence was not legally erroneous or unjust, and
whether your legal entitlements were not violated. The necessity for revision arises when the
court erroneously imposes an immediate jail term on the accused instead of a suspended
sentence or community service. Both the Crown and the accused have the ability to appeal a
sentence in the Court of Appeal separately. However, the defendant's appeal is subject to
greater limitations and necessitates a referral from the Attorney General in order to review a

4. sentence that is deemed too lenient. Legal counsel: There are certain jurisdictions, such as the
UK, where attorneys exert a significant level of influence.
Solicitor:
A solicitor must meet certain legal requirements to practice in a certain country. The 1974
Solicitors Act dictates who can call themselves "solicitors" in England and Wales and what
they must know. Several countries require solicitors to have a law license. Attorneys in England
provide legal advice and preside over court sessions, unlike barristers in the US. In England
and Wales,
Barristers:
barristers are licensed lawyers, along with solicitors. Barristers specialize more in advocacy
(trial work) than attorneys, however the two professions overlap. Solicitors can represent
clients in lesser courts, unlike barristers, who advise and draft documents. High Court clients
can only be represented by barristers. Collectively known as "the bar," judges often rise to the
highest levels from inside. You must enter one of the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincoln's
Inn, or Gray's Inn to become a barrister. Traditionally, barristers must attend a specific number
of formal meals at the local inn. If a student completes all criteria except pupillage, they may
be "called to the bar," receiving the title "barrister" but not allowed to practice law.
LEGAL AID:
A range of court-related costs, such as those connected with hiring an attorney, taking part in
family mediation, or providing testimony in court, may be covered by legal aid funds. This
statute was supposed to guarantee that everyone in America, no matter how much money they
had, could access the legal system. It is now possible for the government to represent you in
criminal and civil cases. But over time, both the categories of cases that qualify for payment
and the total amount of legal aid have grown and shrunk (Cornell, D. L. (1997). A person has
the right to free legal assistance if they are detained and taken to the police station. But in the
event of a civil court appearance, it is crucial to find out if the person can afford legal
representation. Your household income needs to exceed the specified thresholds in order to be
eligible. The assets and disposable income of the partners make up this amount. The ability to
pay for pro bono legal services is a determining factor. Different courts of appeal have
interpreted the same legislation differently, leading to modifications in qualifying conditions.
You are no longer eligible if your gross monthly income is £2,435 or more, or if your liquid
assets exceed £8,000. Even though the requirements for obtaining legal aid have increased,
laws have generally kept up with the times to guarantee that people in need of assistance can
get it. We will talk about the development and reach of legal help programs in the paragraph
that follows. The next significant modification to legal aid was the 1999 enactment of the
Access to Justice Act. The legislation's goal was to modernize the funding and regulatory
framework of the legal aid system to take into consideration the significant developments that
have taken place since the program's founding. The Legal Services Commission was founded
under the Act, which also granted it the power to restructure the way legal aid is provided. To
modernize legal assistance, a new ministerial position was created in 2006, greatly enhancing
the agency's power. Legal Aid offered low-income people legal representation in both criminal
and civil cases. It is evident, though, that the adjustment did not go far enough to reduce Legal

5. Aid expenses. Cuts to Legal Aid funding have once again turned into a political football.
Despite this, after 1949, people's access to the legal system greatly improved. Regretfully, more
restrictive laws were passed in 2013 and drastically cut the amount of money available for legal
aid.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
MEDIATION:
This technique involves using an impartial third party to help the parties concerned
communicate and reach a solution. It is crucial that each party take the initiative during the
mediation. We call this type of mediation "party-centered," indicating that the mediator uses a
range of techniques to keep the proceedings moving forward and the parties striving for a
compromise, while also emphasizing the rights, interests, and needs of the parties.
Communication is facilitated and everyone is kept informed by an impartial third party.
Without giving the parties any prescriptive instructions, the mediator evaluates the issue by
looking at the barriers and relevant laws ("reality-testing"). When a dispute has the potential to
go to court, legal mediation is an alternate form of conflict resolution that could help the parties
come to an understanding. An unbiased third party who assists disputing parties in coming to
a resolution is known as a mediator. Mediating disputes in the professional, community, legal,
diplomatic, commercial, and even family spheres can be beneficial.A range of court-related
costs, such as those connected with hiring an attorney, taking part in family mediation, or
providing testimony in court, may be covered by legal aid funds. This statute was supposed to
guarantee that everyone in America, no matter how much money they had, could access the
legal system. Protecting the democratic ideals of equal protection under the law and the right
to a fair trial is largely the responsibility of the legal system.. It is now possible for the
government to represent you in criminal and civil cases. But over time, both the categories of
cases that qualify for payment and the total amount of legal aid have grown and shrunk
(Cornell, D. L. (1997). A person has the right to free legal assistance if they are detained and
taken to the police station. But in the event of a civil court appearance, it is crucial to find out
if the person can afford legal representation.
Your household income needs to exceed the specified thresholds in order to be eligible. The
assets and disposable income of the partners make up this amount. The ability to pay for pro
bono legal services is a determining factor. Different courts of appeal have interpreted the same
legislation differently, leading to modifications in qualifying conditions. You are no longer
eligible if your gross monthly income is £2,435 or more, or if your liquid assets exceed £8,000.
Even though the requirements for obtaining legal aid have increased, laws have generally kept
up with the times to guarantee that people in need of assistance can get it. We will talk about
the development and reach of legal help programs in the paragraph that follows. The Access to
Justice Act, which was passed into law in 1999, was the law that brought about the subsequent
significant change to legal aid. The purpose of the legislation was to bring the funding and
regulatory framework of the legal aid system into the modern era so that it could take into
account the significant changes that have occurred since the program's inception. In addition
to granting the Legal Services Commission the authority to reorganize the manner in which
legal aid is provided, the Act was responsible for the establishment of the commission.

6. A new ministerial position was established in 2006 with the purpose of modernizing legal
assistance, which resulted in a significant increase in the agency's power. People with low
incomes were able to receive legal representation in both civil and criminal cases through the
Legal Aid program. Nevertheless, it is readily apparent that the modification did not go far
enough to reduce the costs associated with Legal Aid. Reductions in funding for legal aid have
once again become a political football during this administration. In spite of this, after 1949,
there was a significant improvement in people's participation in the legal system. It is
unfortunate that more restrictive laws were passed in 2013, which resulted in a significant
reduction in the amount of money that was available for legal aid.
The amount of money that was intended to be spent on legal aid in England and Wales was
intended to be reduced. As a result of this modification to the policy, all civil cases will now
have access to legal representation, with the exception of those that are exempt from the Access
to Justice Act of 1999. The Access to Justice Act, which was passed into law in 1999, was the
law that brought about the subsequent significant change to legal aid. The purpose of the
legislation was to bring the funding and regulatory framework of the legal aid system into the
modern era so that it could take into account the significant changes that have occurred since
the program's inception. In addition to granting the Legal Services Commission the authority
to reorganize the manner in which legal aid is provided, the Act was responsible for the
establishment of the commission. A new ministerial position was established in 2006 with the
purpose of modernizing legal assistance, which resulted in a significant increase in the agency's
power. People with low incomes were able to receive legal representation in both civil and
criminal cases through the Legal Aid program. Nevertheless, it is readily apparent that the
modification did not go far enough to reduce the costs associated with Legal Aid. Reductions
in funding for legal aid have once again become a political football during this administration.
In spite of this, after 1949, there was a significant improvement in people's participation in the
legal system. It is unfortunate that more restrictive laws were passed in 2013, which resulted
in a significant reduction in the amount of money that was available for legal aid. The amount
of money that was intended to be spent on legal aid in England and Wales was intended to be
reduced. As a result of this modification to the policy, all civil cases will now have access to
legal representation, with the exception of those that are exempt from the Access to Justice Act
of 1999.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
MEDIATION:
This technique involves using an impartial third party to help the parties concerned
communicate and reach a solution. It is crucial that each party take the initiative during the
mediation. We call this type of mediation "party-centered," indicating that the mediator uses a
range of techniques to keep the proceedings moving forward and the parties striving for a
compromise, while also emphasizing the rights, interests, and needs of the parties.
Communication is facilitated and everyone is kept informed by an impartial third party.
Without giving the parties any prescriptive instructions, the mediator evaluates the issue by
looking at the barriers and relevant laws ("reality-testing"). When a dispute has the potential to

7. go to court, legal mediation is an alternate form of conflict resolution that could help the parties
come to an understanding. An unbiased third party who assists disputing parties in coming to
a resolution is known as a mediator. Mediating disputes in the professional, community, legal,
diplomatic, commercial, and even family spheres can be beneficial.
ADR:
Arbitration can be used to resolve legal matters outside of court. An impartial third party will
rule on the dispute. Unless all parties agree that the arbitration procedure and judgement are
nonbinding, an arbitration award is binding and enforceable in court. International business
issues are sometimes resolved by arbitration. Many countries, including the US, use arbitration
to address consumer and employment disputes, which may prevent class actions. Arbitration
agreements that are voluntary for enterprises but compulsory for consumer and employee
contracts must be distinguished.
Part B
PRIMARY:
The Constitution, Acts of Congress, Executive Orders, and Judicial Requirements are the
highest legal authority. The president, legislature, and judiciary establish laws. Any
government needs these three elements at the national, state, and local levels. Executive branch
rules, orders, and proclamations are administrative law. Presidents can issue executive branch
orders. Government administrative agencies like the EPA create new laws and standards. Laws
are made by the legislature and approved by the executive. The judicial branch writes opinions,
cases, and verdicts, which are published in case reports. As its name implies, "common law"
comes from courts. A predefined set of abstract concepts codified by legislation defines the
adversarial system, while individual judges create doctrine in the common law system. Time
will rationalize the common law. Law's "stare decisis" principle requires courts to apply the
same reasoning as analogous cases.
SECONDARY:
Secondary legislation refers to laws created by ministries or organizations under an Act of
Parliament. This document supplements the Acts when needed. Enforcing regulations and
ensuring compliance requires this information. Secondary laws are best for changing or
expanding basic laws. When more is known about a substance's risks, governments employ
secondary legislation like the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971 to outlaw it.
HRA:
On October 1, 2000, (HRA) Act 1998 in the UK took effect after getting Royal Assent on
November 9, 1998. It aims to align British legislation with the Convention rights abuse victims
had to exhaust their options before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. No
federal department or agency may violate the Convention, per the Act. British courts should
likewise study Strasbourg court opinions and interpret statutes in accordance with the
Convention. The judiciary cannot ignore a Congressional Act that violates the Convention. The
Human Rights Act supports Parliamentary Sovereignty because it does not invalidate

8. Parliament's Act. The twelve rights to life, freedom, and security guaranteed by the Convention
on Human Rights. Both first and sixth meetings add five. Many use "unqualified rights" to
emphasize the unchanging nature of ethical norms. Judges shouldn't dispute the validity of
governing body decisions. Thus, asking if a Convention Right was violated is enough.
EU AS A SOURCE OF LAW:
According to Declaration 17 of the Treaty of Lisbon, EU case law is considered final and
obligatory in all circumstances, recognizing its superiority as a source of law. Professor Weiler
then discussed "bi-dimensionalism," which maintains that the CJEU will set the standard and
local courts will enforce it. Cases like Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der
Belastingen and Costa v. ENEL define supremacy for the CJEU. These two rulings ruled that
Member States' acquiescence to a new legal system fundamentally restricted their sovereign
powers. Constitutional plurality results from many systems, such as the EU and domestic
system, each having its own constitutional power. Often referred to as case law or judge-made
law, judicial precedent is commonly utilized in legal systems that follow English common law.
Though imperfect, civil law regimes have incorporated the idea. The body of judicial rulings
is called "precedent" in legal terms. The court opinions in key cases are stored for posterity and
employed widely as teaching materials in legal academe because of their historical value.
Judges must follow these standards because they lack legislative oversight.
SI:
Past judgments are authoritative and may help decide comparable cases (Okur, PINAR)
(2021). Lawyers use "precedent" to refer to a previous rule or decision. Per the Dictionary of
English Law, precedent is "a judgement of a court of justice that is relied upon to support a
thesis for which it is desired to argue." Due to the president's flexibility, the judge may use
"justice" instead of "the law" in the decision. The term "statutory interpretation" refers to how
courts interpret laws. Our research demonstrates that courts often use statutory interpretation
to clarify a statute's meaning even when its text is unambiguous. Even while standards of law
are quite evident, their terminology may be ambiguous or missing in particular. Allow me to
demonstrate the point with an example. The Oxford English Dictionary provides many
instances and information on each word's multiple meanings. Therefore, many judges would
struggle to make court decisions without legislative interpretation. The courts must follow
standard statutory interpretation standards to determine a statute's meaning. The literal rule is
the fastest and easiest way to grasp a document. Judges were to interpret statutes based on their
text, not politicians' intentions. In reading legislation, courts must be literal. However, judges
cannot alter the law to suit a particular result. Literal rules are easy to include into the
constitutional concept.
MORALITY AND LAW:
In order to cultivate harmonious and fruitful interactions among individuals who hold mutual
regard for each other's entitlements, the principles of law and morality serve as two normative
systems that oversee and control human conduct. Both principles originate from a recognition
of the distinct worth of each individual. Both parties derive advantages from this collaboration.

9. Positive law addresses the deficiencies of morality in practice by including the principles of
solidarity and responsibility. However, it cannot be implemented in a purely mechanical
manner due to the constraints imposed by justice and accountability. A multitude of legal
philosophers have addressed the intricate connection between ethics and law. Law and morality
are commonly perceived as conflicting, while certain individuals may regard both as
complementary. Some individuals hold the belief that the principles of law and morality are
closely interconnected. Consequently, they refuse to accept those who violate the law due to
their absence of morality. It might be contended that morality and the rule of law are tightly
interconnected and mutually reinforcing. In order for the latter group to comply with a rule that
is intended to regulate their behavior, the rule must possess moral validity. Legislation should
be crafted with this perspective in mind to guarantee the safety of all citizens and promote the
collective welfare. Consequently, every proposed act must strike a balance between the state's
urgent requirements and its long-term objectives. Habermas argues that the legitimacy of law
and ethics is contingent upon their rational foundation. IMPACT ON
LEGISLATION:
Parliament, being a democratic institution, must evaluate several factors in order to establish
optimal laws for the government and the people. There are multiple circumstances that compel
legislators to reassess their previous judgments before enacting new laws. The Judicial
Commission is just one of several commissions involved, along with the press and the general
public. The media exerts significant influence on the legislative process by informing and
influencing the public. Media mediums, including television, newspapers, radio, and the
Internet, are frequently employed to exert influence on legislative choices. The media possesses
the capacity to enlighten the general public of the negative aspects of proposed legislation.
Newspapers and other media outlets are commercial enterprises, and as such, they may slightly
exaggerate the facts in order to appeal to a larger audience and maximize their financial gains.
Rupert Murdoch, a single media tycoon, possesses and exercises dominion over an extensive
array of media outlets, encompassing newspapers, television networks, and magazines such as
The Times, The Sunday Times, The Sun, and the Sky channel.
Rupert Murdoch exerts significant influence on politicians by integrating his own perspectives
into his media conglomerates. The public expresses its opinions by expressing issues, and if a
sufficient number of parliamentarians share those sentiments, they may vote to amend existing
legislation or enact new laws. Parliament can also be swayed by "pressure groups," which are
organizations or groups that exert influence on parliament to adopt a specific position on an
issue or case. Several influential lawmakers are also affiliated with potent lobbying
organizations that employ diverse tactics to sway politicians. An effective strategy is lobbying,
which involves directly engaging with a lawmaker or government official to advocate for a
desired change in legislation. Marching, protesting, striking, and lobbying are various forms of
direct action that utilize the power of pressure groups to influence legislators. Several advocacy
groups produce pamphlets and distribute them through the news media to raise awareness about
their cause. The decision-making body of Parliament can be swayed by various factions and
interest groups that prioritize different concerns. Groups having a shared objective and a

10. collective understanding of the most efficient means to achieve it deploy lobbying and other
forms of collective action.
Organizations such as the League Against Cruel Sports played a crucial role in advocating for
the amendment of the Hunting Act to ban the exploitation of animals for sport and
entertainment. They fulfill several roles to assist parliament in the adoption of legislation. The
Law Commission, headed by a high court judge, is responsible for the task of modernizing the
law. The commission has four commissioners and a team of administrative staff, supported by
the executive and legislative branches. The commission's main duty is to examine, modify,
modernize, and streamline laws due to the possibility that they may become obsolete, hard to
understand, or burdensome. The commission was founded and bestowed with its authority to
function under the Law Commission Act (1965). In order to preserve its autonomy, the law
commission is prohibited from conducting inquiries into grievances or suggesting novel
legislation; rather, it must function within the confines of established laws. The credibility and
legitimacy of the law commission enhance the significance of its findings and increase the
likelihood of the government adopting them. The commission dedicated a span of five years to
complete the Offences Against the Person Act, which encompasses numerous additional
legislations. However, only around half of the commission's recommendations were approved
by parliament.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bentham, Jeremy. "An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation." New York:
Prometheus Books, 1988.
Brink, David. "Kantian Rationalism: Inescapability, Authority, and Supremacy." In Ethics and
Practical Reason, edited by Garrett Cullity and Berys Gaut, Oxford: Oxford University Press,
255-291.
Churchland, Patricia. "Braintrust: What Neuroscience Reveals About Morality." Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Aquinas, Thomas, wrote the Summa Theologiae in Paris. Baier's book, titled "The Moral Point
of View," was published by Cornell University Press in Ithaca, NY.
Baumard, Nicolas, Jean-Baptiste André, and Dan Sperber (2013) propose a mutualistic
perspective on morality in their article titled "A Mutualistic Approach to Morality: The
Evolution of Fairness by Partner Choice". The article was published in the journal Behavioral
and Brain Sciences, volume 36, issue 1, pages 59-78. The article's DOI is
10.1017/S0140525X11002202.