• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

As law assignment 2.2

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Assignment 2.2 Judicial Precedent The doctrine of judicial precedent, also known as Case Law, is a system often used within case law, is of relatively recent origin. It means that a judge deciding a case must follow earlier decisions of a higher court, or equal court in order to reach a decision (decisions in case law are known as judgements). Judicial precedent really started to gain full flow in the 19th century In 1833, as previous cases were already frequently referred to, Baron Parke (an important judge at the time) said that precedents must be regarded and referred to in all future cases, and that the courts could now not reject them. The case that Parke made his decision regarding precedent on was Mirehouse v Rennell 1833. That rule is still in effect today. The way that the system of judicial precedent works regarding the hierarchy of the courts is rather complex. Each court, when precedent is required, must use previous decisions of a superior or equal court. ...read more.

Middle

Obiter Dicta encompasses all parts of judgement not taken in with the ration decidendi. Judicial Precedent is well reputed as a good system, for many reasons are: * Certainty - Judges will not make their own random decisions, and litigants can plan their affairs, as they know that cases will be treated alike. * Detailed practical rules - Many statutes are often based on theory and logic, whereas judicial precedent is always based on real situations. * Free Market in Legal Ideas - A good example of this is the statement of the right wing philosopher Hayek, who believes that legislation should be almost non-existent, and that case law should become predominant. Therefore, Hayeks ideas see that law can develop in response to demand. * Flexibility - The law has to be flexible, and able to change quickly just as society does. With the system of judicial precedent, changes can be made in the law far quicker than if parliament were to make those changes. Of course, the system of judicial precedent is not without it's faults. ...read more.

Conclusion

The 1966 practice direction plays a major role in this aspect of law. The 1966 practice direction was a statement by the judicial section of the House of Lords. They said that they would modify their present practice, and that they would no longer be bound by it's own decisions. In my opinion, the entire English legal system should be able to use the 1966 practice direction, to make the system more simple. Another factor that plays a major role in this aspect of law is William Blackstone's declaratory theory. This theory states that judges do not make law, but merely, by the rules of precedent, discover and declare the law that has always been. Blackstone's declaratory theory. This theory is probably true, and I agree with it. Blackstone was a clever man, and this theory still makes sense today. Judges can be creative through case law as theyhave to act upon their best judgement to create new law. Alex Lyons 12SFBU 1 23/01/08 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Tort section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Discuss the extent to which discrimination is prohibited under English and Welsh law (25 ...

    5 star(s)

    Act 2000 which allows transsexuals who register their new gender to be treated as such e.g. if they are born male and the become female. Another act which aims to prevent sex discrimination is the Civil Partnership Act 2004 which allows same sex partners to register their partnership and receive some of the benefits of marriages e.g.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Taking selected areas of the civil and or criminal law, evaluate whether sportsmen and ...

    4 star(s)

    The reasonable man test is an objective test, chosen because a subjective test would be impossible. The classic statement was given by Alderson B in Blyth v Birmingham waterworks Co (1856) 11 Ex 781 'negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Critically evaluate the principles governing the law on Intoxication.

    3 star(s)

    The Majewski case is a major case in intoxication and the major rules are developed from it. This was similar to the outcome of the case in Lipman as although the defendant lacked the mens rea he was still not allowed to use the defence because the judiciary took the

  2. UNIT3 ASSIGNMENT4 LAW OF TORT

    As you will see, the tort of nuisance is not so involved as the tort of negligence, but it is an important, and a difficult tort, not from the point of view of the difficulty in learning about it, but from a practice point of view: that it usually involves

  1. Three liability cases - Claim 1-- Auto Emergency Breakdown Service Claim 2- Santa ...

    In Wilsons and Clyde Coal Co Ltd v English (1938) Lord Wright stated that the duty required the provision of a competent staff of men, adequate material, and proper system and effective supervision'. Later cases have included a requirement to provide a safe place of work.

  2. tort law

    Breach of duty of care is recognised if the defendant fails to come up to that standard. This is judged by the following factors; - What did the defendant know? - What was the degree of risk? The greater the risk the more serious the harm can be inflicted, therefore

  1. In this report, the differences between contractual liability and tortuous liability are explained. In ...

    The duty is said to be breached when the duty is said to occur as per the standards of the reasonable prudent person and the same standard is not met by the defendant. What is the standard varies from person to person is different from an expert.

  2. Tort law assignment. Brian fell against the standard of care a reasonable man would ...

    parties The size of any class that the person receiving the advice belonged to. The degree of knowledge of the person giving the advice. Reliance by the advisee. In taking these factors into account, Brian?s purpose for which he made the statement ?trust me, buy their shares you will be

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work