[QUOTE=Monty]
Here are a couple of other questions:
[ul][li]How different are the courtroom procedures among the Commonwealth nations?[/ul][/li][/QUOTE]
well, we all started out from much the same roots, but there’s been gradual divergence as we went from colonial status to full independence, and developed our own indigenous bars and customs.
When I go to court in Canada, the outfit depends on the court and the type of proceedings. In the lower provincial courts (Provincial Court, municipal court, traffic safety/justices of the peace), male lawyers just wear suits and ties (females wear whatever the female equivalent is to suit and tie - as a mere male, I wouldn’t presume to try to prescribe what that equivalent might be!) Some daring souls have tried sports jackets, and one or two have even gone to turtlenecks, but I’ve heard that such sartorial experiments may trigger disapproving comments from certain judges.
In the superior courts (i.e. - provincial trial and appellate courts where the judges are appointed by the federal government; the Federal Courts; and the Supreme Court of Canada) we gown for trials and appeals. (And yes, “gown” is a verb.) That is, we wear a white shirt with a wing collar (similar to a tuxedo shirt, but without the frills); two long white tabs instead of a tie; a long-sleeved black waistcoat; and a black gown (sort of like a cape) over the waistcoat. We don’t wear wigs. However, if it’s just a chambers appearence, we wear suits and ties (if male). If I’m not sure what to wear I’ll phone the local registrar and ask if I’m to gown for the appearence.
In my jurisdiction, we address the Provincial Court judges as “Your Honour” and the superior court judges as “M’Lord” or “M’Lady”. In the Supreme Court, we use “Justice So-and-so” in English, and “M. le juge / Mme la juge” in French.
If you’re asking about actual procedure, either civil or criminal, it’s very similar to that of England & Wales in most Canadian jurisdictions (Quebec being an exception in civil matters, given their civil law roots, but identical in criminal procedure, since that’s a matter of uniform federal jurisdiction). That’s no surprise, since our legal systems were set up on the English model. Our procedure would be similar to that used in US courts, but closer to the English roots, since you guys down south diverged from the English model a century earlier. That difference meant that most British colonies got the benefit of the major procedural reforms in England in the mid-19th century, which did not necessarily find their way into the U.S. systems. When I’m looking at US pleadings, I’m often struck by what seems to me to be somewhat archaic language and terms in your system.