This is the worst (or, on another interpretation, the best) time in history to undertake such research, as Civil Procedure Rules 1999 reshaped both the landscape and language of litigation before the English courts. These rules, as well as abandoning the use of time honoured Latin terminology such as "subpoena" and "inter partes" and even much of the traditional English legal vocabulary such as "writ", "plaintiff", "summons" and "discovery". The reform was largely brought about through Lord Justice Woolf, who wanted the law to be more accessible to "the man in the Clapham Omnibus". http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/1999/0899Bulletin/UK_CivilProcedure.html
In fact, the best way to approach this thesis is probably to examine the arguments behind the reforms, as no doubt certain terms will have been examined by the committee concerned and analysed as being problematic. http://www.istructe.org/thestructuralengineer/HC/Abstract.asp?PID=6418
WOOLF, H K, Access to Justice (Interim Report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales, HMSO, London, 1995)
In fact, the only way in which you are going to find a text of the kind you want, would be to go back to old jurisprudence. It is now a disciplinary offence, so I understand, to use Latin in court. We never did use as many Latin terms as Italian lawyers -- in recent history, anyway.