Judicial Precedent

legal precedent A judgment of a hook of fairness cited as an authority for deciding a similar beat of facts a matter which serves as authority for the legal principle corporal in its finish. The common jurisprudence has developed by broadening pass from precedent to precedent. A judicial precedent is a stopping point of the chat up used as a source for future decision making. This is know as st ar decisis (to stand upon decisions) and by which precedents are authoritative and back and moldiness be dramatizeed.In giving judgment in a cause, the venture will come out out the facts of the case, state the law applicable to the facts and then provide his or her decision. It is only the balance decidendi (the legal argument or ground for the judicial decision) which is covering on by and by court of justices at a lower place the system of judicial precedent. Any observation made by the enunciate on a legal question suggested by the case ahead him or her but not a rising in such a flair as requiring a decision is cognise as obiter dictum (a give tongue to by the way).There may several reasons for a decision provided by the judge in any devoted judgment and one must not assume that a reason can be regarded as obiter because some an some some another(prenominal)(prenominal) ratio has been provided. Thus, it is not always easy to distinguish ratio decidendi from obiter dictum when evaluating the make of a particular decision. A single decision of a superior court is absolutely binding on sequent inferior courts.However, certain of the superior courts regard themselves as backfire by their own decisions whilst others do not 1. Decisions of the signaling of Lords bind all other courts but the class does not regard itself as strictly funk by its previous decisions, for example, in Murphy v Brentwood District Council (1990) the House elected to over command its ahead decision in Anns v capital of the United Kingdom Borough of Merton ( 1978) on the issue of a local authoritys liability in inadvertence to future purchasers of property. 2.The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, holds itself bound by its previous decisions recent v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd (1944) but in that case besides identified three exceptional cases where it would disregard its own previous decision. These are (i) where two Court of Appeal decisions conflict (ii) if the decision although not expressly decreed conflicts with a ulterior decision of the House of Lords and (iii) if the before decision was given up per incuriam (through want of care) however it cannot ignore a decision of the House of Lords on the same basis. . Divisional courts of the High Court have adopted the sway laid bond out in girlishs case although judges sitting at first instance are not bound to follow the decisions of other High Court judges although they tend to do so for the interest group of certainty Judicial precedent is an important source of English law a s an original precedent is one which creates and applies a new rule. However, the later decisions, especially of the higher courts, can have a number of effectuate upon precedents..In particular, they may be Reversed where on appeal in the same case the decision is reversed, the initial decision will polish off to have any effect Overruled where in a later case a higher court decides that the first case was wrongly dogged A refusal to follow this arises where a court, not bound by the decision, cannot countermand it but does not wish to follow it so it simply refuses to follow the earlier decision Distinguished where an earlier case is rejected as authority, either because the material facts differ or because the statement of law in the previous case is too narrow to be properly utilise to the new set of facts Explained a judge may seek to make up an earlier decision beforehand applying it or distinguishing it, thus the effect of the earlier case is varied in the circumstance s of the present caJudicial PrecedentJudicial 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 collective 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 judgment in a case, the judge will set out the facts of the case, state the law applicable to the facts and then provide his or her decision. It is only the ratio decidendi (the legal debate or ground for the judicial decision) which is binding on later courts to a lower place the system of judicial precedent. Any observation made by the judge on a legal question suggested by the case before him or her but not arising in such a demeanor as requiring a decision is known as obiter dictum (a precept by the way).There may several reasons for a decision provided by the judge in any given judgment and one must not assume that a reason can be regarded as obiter because some other ratio has been provided. Thus, it is not always easy to distinguish ratio decidendi from obiter dictum when evaluating the effects of a particular decision. A single decision of a superior court is absolutely binding on sequent inferior courts.However, certain of the superior courts regard themselves as bound by their own decisions whilst others do not 1. Decisions of the House of Lords bind all other courts but the House does not regard itself as strictly bound by its previous decisions, for example, in Murphy v Brentwood District Council (1990) the House elected to overrule its earlier decision in Anns v capital of the United Kingdom Borough of Merton (1978) on the issue of a local authoritys liability in negligence to future purchasers of property. 2.T he Court of Appeal, Civil Division, holds itself bound by its previous decisions Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd (1944) but in that case in like manner identified three exceptional cases where it would disregard its own previous decision. These are (i) where two Court of Appeal decisions conflict (ii) if the decision although not expressly overruled conflicts with a later decision of the House of Lords and (iii) if the earlier decision was given per incuriam (through want of care) however it cannot ignore a decision of the House of Lords on the same basis. . Divisional courts of the High Court have adopted the rule laid down in Youngs case although judges sitting at first instance are not bound to follow the decisions of other High Court judges although they tend to do so for the involvement of certainty Judicial precedent is an important source of English law as an original precedent is one which creates and applies a new rule. However, the later decisions, especially of the hig her courts, can have a number of effects upon precedents..In particular, they may be Reversed where on appeal in the same case the decision is reversed, the initial decision will leave to have any effect Overruled where in a later case a higher court decides that the first case was wrongly pertinacious A refusal to follow this arises where a court, not bound by the decision, cannot overrule it but does not wish to follow it so it simply refuses to follow the earlier decision Distinguished where an earlier case is rejected as authority, either because the material facts differ or because the statement of law in the previous case is too narrow to be properly employ to the new set of facts Explained a judge may seek to hand over an earlier decision before applying it or distinguishing it, thus the effect of the earlier case is varied in the circumstances of the present ca