that there is nothing constant in this world except change. The only difference could be the speed at which the wheels of transformation may spin. The idea of justice and the manner of its implementation are no exception to this universal rule. Judicial reforms should‚ therefore‚ be at the centre stage in the fast transforming world in which we live. It is imperative for enhancing the quality of justice that is at the core of human existence and welfare of any society. It is simply the fundamental
Premium Law Separation of powers Judge
Judicial precedent: A judgment of a court of law cited as an authority for deciding a similar set of facts; a case which serves as authority for the legal principle embodied in its decision. The common law has developed by broadening down from precedent to precedent. A judicial precedent is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision making. This is known as stare decisis (to stand upon decisions) and by which precedents are authoritative and binding and must be followed. In giving
Free Common law Precedent Stare decisis
Judicial Decisions.The effective law making process of modern Malaysia Table of Content Introduction Malaysian Judiciary Judiciary Administration Law Making Process … … Conclusion Introduction History of Malaysian Law Different countries practices difference types of legal system. Some country practices one type of legal system while other practices the mixed legal system which means a combination of two or more legal systems. Malaysia for example‚ practices the mixed legal system which
Free Separation of powers Law
PRECEDENT: Stare Decisis - Stand by the Decision The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis‚ this means that like cases should be treated alike. Once a point of law has been decided in a particular case‚ that law must be applied in all future cases containing the same material facts. For example in the case “Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)‚ The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed the duty of care to the ultimate consumer of the product. This set a binding
Premium Stare decisis Appeal Common law
THE DOCTRINE OF BINDING PRECEDENT INTRODUCTION The doctrine of binding precedent means the process whereby judges follow previously decided cases where the facts are of sufficient similarity. The doctrine of judicial precedent involves an application of the principle of stare decisis i.e.‚ to stand by the decided. In practice‚ this means that inferior courts are bound to apply the legal principles set down by superior courts in earlier cases. This provides consistency and predictability in the
Premium Stare decisis Case law Precedent
DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT - LAW MAKING POTENTIAL More Judicial Precedent Resources: Judicial Precedent - Lecture Notes #1 THE JUDGES’ ROLE IN PRECEDENT The old view of the judges’ role was that they were merely ’declaring’ the existing law (the ’declaratory theory’). Lord Esher stated in Willis v Baddeley [1892] 2 QB 324: "There is ... no such thing as judge-made law‚ for the judges do not make the law‚ though they frequently have to apply existing law to circumstances as to which it has not
Premium Common law Stare decisis Law
Judicial Precedent Judicial precedent is the process whereby judges follow previously decided cases where the facts or point of law are sufficiently similar. It involves the following principles: First‚ stare decisis‚ which means to stand by the decided‚ whereby lower courts are bound to apply the legal principles set down by superior courts in earlier cases and appellate courts follow their own previous decisions. For example: The High Court must follow decisions of the Court of Appeal
Premium Stare decisis Case law Precedent
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION PART II ON WHAT GROUNDS CAN JUDICIAL REVIEW BE SOUGHT? The grounds for JR can be classified in at least three ways: 1. Two principal classes of action may be pursued under JR: those which allege that there has been a breach of statutory requirements‚ and those alleging that action has been taken in disregard of the rules of ‘natural justice’. 2. In Council for the Civil Service Unions v Minister of State for the
Premium Human rights Law Administrative law
1988 Judicial Crisis In 1988‚on the ground of misconduct‚ Tun Salleh Abas by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammad was brought before a tribunal and this tribunal was chaired by Tun Hamid Omar. Due to the constitutionality of the tribunal‚ Tun Salleh Abas filed a suit in the High Court of Kuala Lumpur and while proceeding‚ interim stay against the tribunal was applied by Tun Salleh Abas until July 4‚ 1988 but the request then denied. Later‚however‚ an interlocutory order was granted to Tun
Premium Mahathir bin Mohamad
Judicial Precedent Judicial precedent means the decisions of the higher courts automatically binds the lower courts according to the hierarchy of the courts. This refers to the doctrine of stare decisis. For example‚ the Supreme Court decision binds the Court of Appeal‚ Divisional Courts‚ High Court and County Court. Ratio decidendi is the principle of the case or reasons for the decision and it is binding. In London Street Tramways v. London County Council‚ it said that certainty in the
Premium Stare decisis Precedent Supreme Court of the United States