Institutions Essay Title: ‘Judicial precedent is best understood as a practice of the courts and not as a set of binding rules. As a practice it could be refined or changed by the courts as they wish.’ Discuss Judicial precedent is a judgment or decision of a court which is used as an authority for reaching the same decision in subsequent cases. In English law‚ judgment and decisions can represent authoritative precedent (which is generally binding
Premium Precedent Common law Case law
often‚ they are not‚ and candidates use words like “furthermore” and “moreover” in an attempt to demonstrate linkage that is lacking in reality. Candidates need to consider the basic structure of the essay‚ with an introduction‚ development and a conclusion. There needs to be fluency‚ and cohesion between the separate elements. Definitions are often required and their proper place is within the introduction‚ indicating to the Examiner that the candidate understands the key area of the essay/question
Premium
the reasoning and rationale followed by the Judge(s) are sound and whether or not it is in line with the conclusion that a reasonable man would reach if he was presented with the same facts. We will delve into three recent court cases‚ and examine the reasoning of the Judge(s) for reaching a different conclusion and the reasons why the tax community was not impressed with the conclusions reached in the judgment handed down. Where possible‚ the principles determined by similar foreign cases have
Premium Stare decisis Supreme court Tax
doctrine of judicial precedent is important because it is the ratio decidendi of a previously decided similar case‚ decided by a higher court to the current facts that will decide the solution of the case. 1 JUDICIAL PRECEDENT The weight or authority of rules of law derived from cases may vary. These relative weights are determined by the doctrine of precedent. Nearly all legal systems (including civil law systems) have some form of a doctrine of precedent‚ though its provisions
Premium Common law
The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis which means ‘to stand by what has been decided’. It is a common law principle whereby judges are bound to follow previous decisions in cases where the material facts are sufficiently similar and the earlier decision was made in a court above the current one in the court hierarchy. This doctrine of precedent is extremely strong in English law as it ensures fairness and consistency and it highlights the importance of case
Premium Common law Stare decisis Law
University of London Common Law Reasoning and Institutions Essay Title: ‘Judicial precedent is best understood as a practice of the courts and not as a set of binding rules. As a practice it could be refined or changed by the courts as they wish.’ Student Number: 090500532 Candidate Number:L8000 The declaratory theory of English common law is that the function of the judge is to declare what has always been the correct legal position at common law. In carrying out this task
Free Common law Law
[pic] [pic] Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 3 BID AND PREPARATIONS 3 COSTS 3 MARKETING 3 PARTICIPATING TEAMS 3 INTRODUCTION The 2010 Winter Olympics‚ officially the XXI Olympic Winter Games or the 21st Winter Olympics‚ was a major international multi-sport event held on February 12–28‚ 2010‚ in Vancouver‚ British Columbia‚ Canada‚ with some events held in the resort town of Whistler‚ Richmond‚ West
Premium 2010 Winter Olympics Olympic Games Winter Olympic Games
Reasoning and Institutions Question 1: “in practice the doctrine of precedent does not constrain judicial decision-making; activist judges can always creatively interpret previous cases to reach the outcome they desire.” Discuss. Answer: In considering whether the doctrine of precedent constrain activist judges like Lord Denning in making their decision‚ we should first examine the English legal system and how judicial precedents operates. The lowest court of law in England and Wales‚ which
Premium Stare decisis Common law Precedent
AFFECT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT ON JUDICIAL PRECEDENT Although the Human Rights Act 1998 has impacted on the judicial understanding of precedent‚ the underlying features of the doctrine remain unchanged. The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on one of the most fundamental aspects of any legal system and that is‚ all like cases must be treated alike. It involves the application of the principle of stare decisis i.e to stand by the decided. The doctrine of judicial precedent has always played a pre-eminent
Premium Stare decisis Common law Case law
doctrine of judicial precedent‚ which predominant value is irrefutable. However‚ it is a disputable question‚ whether the bias of the doctrine on the maintenance of the judicial authority is accurate and contemporary. The nature of precedent can be described by putting the words of Lord Denning in London tramways case: Rule of precedent is not a rule of law at all‚ but a practice laid down by the court for its own guidance; and this practice can be amended or altered. Thus‚ the precedent should
Premium Stare decisis Common law Law