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
Judicial Precedent means the process whereby judges follow the decisions made by previous judges in similar cases where the facts are of sufficient similarity. In deciding a case‚ there will be basic tasks‚ establishing what the facts are‚ meaning what actually happened‚ as well as how the law applies to those facts. The idea of judicial precedent is that once a decision has been made in a set of particular facts‚ similar facts in later cases should be treated in the same way. The rules concerning
Premium Stare decisis Common law Precedent
Judicial Precedent is another important source of law‚ it is an independent source of law‚ where there are no legislations on the particular point in statute Books‚ and Judicial Precedent works great. Judicial precedent has been accepted as one of the important sources of law in most of the legal systems. It is also a continuous‚ growing source of law. According to Salmond‚ the doctrine of precedent has two meanings‚ namely (1) in a loose sense precedent includes merely reported case-law which may
Free Common law Precedent Law
established is the same and the facts or points of law are sufficiently similar every court is In England and Wales the courts operate a very rigid doctrine of precedent which has the effect that bound by the decisions made by courts above it in the hierarchy and in general courts are bound by their own past decisions. The doctrine of Precedent is the process whereby judges should follow previous decisions in similar cases to help maintain a degree of consistency in the way the law is applied in similar
Premium Stare decisis Ratio decidendi Case 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
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
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 be deemed
Premium Stare decisis Common law 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 use of precedent has been justified as providing predictability‚ stability‚ fairness‚ and efficiency in the law. Reliance upon precedent contributes predictability to the law because it provides notice of what a person’s rights and obligations are in particular circumstances. A person contemplating an action has the ability to know beforehand the legal outcome. It also means that lawyers can give legal advice to clients based on settled rules of law. The use of precedent also stabilizes
Premium Brown v. Board of Education Law Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
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