Answer:
The correct answer is D. Judges in a common law system have the power to interpret the common law so that it applies to the unique circumstances of an individual case.
Explanation:
The common law system is based, above all, on the analysis of judicial sentences handed down by the same court or one of its higher courts (those to which decisions made by said court can be appealed) and on the interpretations that in these sentences are given from the laws. This is why the laws can be ambiguous in many respects, as the courts are expected to clarify them (or they have already done so on previous, but similar, laws).
On the other hand, there are judicial interpretations that create new legal figures, which in the beginning was the norm, but today is the exception. However, the nomenclature that recognizes as a statutory offense, for example, the offense created by law, is maintained. At present, it is much more common for laws to create completely new figures or to standardize and set the rules previously established by court sentences.
A very important detail is that, in subsequent cases, the sufficient reason of the sentences previously handed down obliges a court (and all courts below this) to fail to the same way or similarly. This is why the study of the system is based on the detailed analysis of the sentences from which the norm is induced, a study that ends in the elaboration of a "typical case", which is compared with the situation under study to see if it is similar or not. On many occasions, several sentences containing the same principle, viewed from different perspectives, are analyzed to finally extract the rule that will be applied to the case under study.
1. The desire to make money through the production of goods and services.
2.Uses only free-market principles
3. Provide equality (i think)
4.Protecting freedom of choice
Ecuador is not in north America it's in Africa
There really arent correct qualities of a poet. Each poet will have different qualities.
