Rather, they will expand their borrowing and transplantation efforts and strive to achieve the “perfect rule” among the available rules of existing civil law, just as all common law systems do when they fail to find a flashy and creative new solution in a particular area. This gives them great potential as models when legal harmonisation and unification are on the agenda or when the two classic Eurocentric legal families stagnate and need inspiration. Scotland is a country that has neither a colonial past nor an economic “late bloomer”, but which has nevertheless developed into a mixed system. Until the early nineteenth century, Scottish private law resembled that of an uncodified civil system. From then on, it was developed by lawyers and courts in a more casuistic direction, following English law and precedents, which, also due to the political union with England, penetrated over time the civil foundations, thus following the general trend of European civil law, with the fact that it never completely abandoned civil influence. Whether Scots law is therefore the result of a conscious choice of the “best rule” or rather represents the Scottish history of foreign influence and, to some extent, control is controversial. In addition, the legislation has also created a number of specialized courts to deal with specialized areas of law of importance to the public and to avoid a delay in the main infrastructure of law administration. These courts exist alongside the judicial hierarchy; Their decisions are therefore subject to the same appeal and review procedure by the ordinary courts, from a certain level, depending on the specialised court concerned. Within these specialized courts, there are, to name but a few, the Court of Appeal for Competition, the Electoral Tribunal, the Land Claims Tribunal and the Labour and Labour Court of Appeal.  Mixed legal systems such as those in Scotland and South Africa differ from the traditional common law and civil law systems in that they combine aspects of both traditional families.
This is why they are also called “hybrid systems” or “pluralistic jurisdictions” and embody a third legal family. For example, according to Du Plessis and Palmer, the mere existence of both customary and civil aspects is not enough. They called for sufficient emphasis on these two elements to speak of a “mixed legal system in the strict sense,” while the aspect of bilingualism, that is, the appearance of more than one language, is perceived in a legal system as a characteristic rather than a criterion.  The classification as “best” rule is, of course, characterized by a high degree of subjectivity and depends on the situation. In retrospect, the choice of a mixed system is not always optimal. As Du Plessis puts it in his article “Comparative Law and Mixed Legal Systems” for The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law at page 495: “It will simply be necessary to accept that mixed systems, like other systems, can sometimes do good and sometimes evil.” South Africa has a “hybrid” or “mixed” legal system formed by the interweaving of a number of different legal traditions: a civil law system inherited from the Dutch, a customary law system inherited from the British, and a customary law system inherited from indigenous Africans (often called African customary law, of which there are many variations depending on tribal origin). These traditions had a complex relationship, with English influence most clearly expressed in procedural aspects of the legal system and jurisprudential methods, and Romano-Dutch influence most clearly expressed in its substantive private law.  As a general rule, South Africa follows English law in matters of criminal and civil procedure, company law, constitutional law and the law of evidence; while Roman-Dutch common law is followed in South African contract law, tort law, personal law, substantive law, family law, etc. With the entry into force of the interim constitution in 1994 and its replacement in 1997, the final constitution, another component was added to this fabric. 5 Potential of mixed legal systems as creative sources of their own types of rules  Although Scotland is not alone: the Channel Islands also have a mixed system, according to Reid in his journal article “The Idea of Mixed Legal Systems” in Tulane Law Review 78 (1&2) of 2003, although it is far from trade routes and does not fit properly into the pattern of economic “laggards”.