Doctrine of Binding Precedent
Essay Topic- Discuss the advantages & disadvantages of following the practice of precedent in a legal sense.
Answer:- The doctrines of binding precedent is concerned with the importance of case laws in English legal system. If one case has decided a point of law then it is logical that solution will be looked at in the future. The American Judge, Oliver Wendell said ‘the life of the law has not been logic it has been experience’, Miles Kingston put it another way: binding precedent means ‘A trick which has been tried before successfully’.
According to Sir Rupert Cross, binding precedent indicates: all courts must consider relevant case laws. Secondly, lower court must follow the decision of the courts above then in hierarchy. Finally, appellate courts are generally bound by their own decisions. As Lord Hailsham, the LC pointed out ‘in the hierarchical system of courts which exists in this country, it is necessary for each lower tier, including the CA, to accept loyally the decisions of the higher tiers’.
Before going to further discussion, the operation of precedent needs to be looked at. Before 1966, House of Lords was always bound by their own decisions. In 1966 Practice Statement the Law Lords had decided ‘while treating former decisions of this House as normally binding, to depart from previous decisions when it appears right to do so’. If we look at the Court of Appeal, decisions are binding on the High Court and the county courts but they do not bind the House of Lords.
In Young v Bristol Aero plane co. Ltd a full Court of Appeal of six members decided that CA Civil Division was normally so bound subject to the following three exceptions: * Where its own previous decisions conflict. The court of Appeal must decide which to follow and which to reject. * Where to follow a decision of its own which conflicts with a decision of the House of Lords even though its decision has not been expressly overruled by the House of Lords. * Where an
Answer:- The doctrines of binding precedent is concerned with the importance of case laws in English legal system. If one case has decided a point of law then it is logical that solution will be looked at in the future. The American Judge, Oliver Wendell said ‘the life of the law has not been logic it has been experience’, Miles Kingston put it another way: binding precedent means ‘A trick which has been tried before successfully’.
According to Sir Rupert Cross, binding precedent indicates: all courts must consider relevant case laws. Secondly, lower court must follow the decision of the courts above then in hierarchy. Finally, appellate courts are generally bound by their own decisions. As Lord Hailsham, the LC pointed out ‘in the hierarchical system of courts which exists in this country, it is necessary for each lower tier, including the CA, to accept loyally the decisions of the higher tiers’.
Before going to further discussion, the operation of precedent needs to be looked at. Before 1966, House of Lords was always bound by their own decisions. In 1966 Practice Statement the Law Lords had decided ‘while treating former decisions of this House as normally binding, to depart from previous decisions when it appears right to do so’. If we look at the Court of Appeal, decisions are binding on the High Court and the county courts but they do not bind the House of Lords.
In Young v Bristol Aero plane co. Ltd a full Court of Appeal of six members decided that CA Civil Division was normally so bound subject to the following three exceptions: * Where its own previous decisions conflict. The court of Appeal must decide which to follow and which to reject. * Where to follow a decision of its own which conflicts with a decision of the House of Lords even though its decision has not been expressly overruled by the House of Lords. * Where an