AnalysisoftheimpactofdietonthelegalconstructionAbstractInthispaper,basedonthehabitsoftheword,carefullyreadtheEnglish,German,Japanese,traditionalChineselegalsystemconstruction-relatedcontent,analysisofnationallegalconstructionaccustomedtothestatusandroleandtrytoraisethelegalsystemofcontemporaryChinaConstruction.CustomaryforChineselegalsystemisgood,thereisthetraditionalbasis;habitscompilationhabitsonChineselegalsystemtoachieveoneoftheimportantinfluence.PaperKeywordscustomarylegalsystemimpactInspirationThiscausedahumblecountry,formingaMAKcountry,namelyhabits.Soifignoringthenation’shabits,andprovidesavarietyoflaws,youcannotexpecttocarryoutadministrationofthecompleteperson.Customarylawiswhateverculturalcontextaretheoriginoftheexistenceofalaw,therearemanylegalrulesdirectlyfromthehabit.First,thehabitsoftheBritishlegalsystem1(A)anindividualistichabitsonthebackgroundofanimpactPersonaldoctrinereferslawsapplytoanethnicgroup,nation,andthisnationineverypersonhavethelaw,nomatterwheretheyareapplicabletothislaw.Montesquieuinhis‘SpiritoftheLawsof’personalanalysisoftheGermaniclawdoctrinecauses,hebelievesenvironmentalfactorsGermanicpeoplelivingthewaytheyliketoliveseparately,resultinginvariousgroupsliveseparatelyproducerespectivehabitsandtheirapproachtoproblems,whentheGermanicvariousgroupscometogether,theynaturallyaccordingtotheirexistinghabitstodealwiththeproblem,whichisunderstoodbyMontesquieupersonaldoctrineoftheorigin.(Two)areindividualisticimpactonEnglandanditscoloniesGermanicpersonalideologysuchaprofoundimpactonthedevelopmentdirectionoftheworldoflaw,theKingdomofEnglandWilliamI,DukeofNormandy,FranceturnedinhisconquestofEngland,anddidnotputtheirterritoryinstilltheoriginalsetoflegalsysteminEngland,England,butintherespectforthe2localpeopletocarryouttheoriginalsettlealawsuitcustomarypractices,whicheffectivelyeasethecontradictionwiththeAnglo-Saxons,toconsolidatehisruleinEngland.LaterHenryIIofEnglandtocontinuetheimplementationofpersonaldoctrine,aseriesofjudicialreform,heregularlysentassizescommissionertothecountry,theseinvestigatorsCommissioner,inadditiontothekingaccordingtotheedictdecree,butismainlybasedonGermaniccustomarylawandlocalhabits.Whatevertheythinkisright,reasonable,andwiththeking’slegislationdoesnotconflictwiththecustomsandpractices,hewasrecognizedasabasisforjudgment.TheyoftengatherinthecentrallocationoftheexchangeofviewsofWestminster,thejudgmentoftheirmutualrecognition.Thus,someofthecitedasthebasisbecamecustomaryintheformofcommonlawjurisprudence.Inshort,theBritish‘ismostcommonandgeneralacceptanceorwidespreadnationalhabitsbased;Britishordinary,generalpracticebecomescommon.’Withthismeasure,thecentraljudicialpowertounifythelocallordsjudicialpowerbeweakened.3ThishabitimplementedverywelltothelaterBritishcolonialrulewhich,whentheBritishruledHongKong,didnottheBritishlawdirectlyapplicabletotheChinesecommunitytogo,butwhenbothpartiesorunilaterallyisBritishEnglishlawisonlyapplicable,resultingintheBritishcolonialruleimplementationisindividualism.ThelocalChinesecommunityisstillinvokedQinglaw,onlywhentheirlegalvalueinserioushumanrightsviolations,theBritishHongKonglegislaturewillintervene.Sothatsuchaphenomenonoccurs,agovernment,twojudicialbodies,astimegoeson,thelocalChineseacceptedandrecognizedthevalueoftheBritishlawwhentheyareinthe1970s,togiveuptheQingCodeasalegalsuitablebasisfororiginal...