By reference to case law examples explain the concepts of ratio decedendi and obiter dicta to the doctrine of judicial precedent.

By reference to case law examples explain the concepts of “ratio decedendi” and “obiter dicta” to the doctrine of judicial precedent.

In a judge’s decision there are several elements. There will always be material of facts found and indirect statements of the principle of law and finally the decision based on these two.

Ratio Decidendi is Latin for ‘reason for deciding’; it may be understood as the statement of the law applied in deciding the legal problem raised by the concrete facts of the case.

Judgements are made on a Stare Decisis basis, where cases are treated alike but if a judge considers that the facts of a case are sufficiently different from a previous case then he may refuse to follow that decision.

The difficulty in the search for the ratio becomes acute when more than one judgment is promulgated. An example is the case of Kay v. Lambeth LBC, on which a panel of seven of their Lordships sat, and from whose opinions emerged a number of competing ratios, some made express by their Lordships and others implicit in the decision. As well as this sometimes it is hardly ever expressly.

As an example, the Ratio Decidendi in Donoghue v. Stevenson would be that a person owes a duty of care to those who he can reasonably foresee will be affected by his actions. ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

As an example, the Ratio Decidendi in Donoghue v. Stevenson would be that a person owes a duty of care to those who he can reasonably foresee will be affected by his actions. Ratio Decidendi also involves the holding of a particular case, thereby allowing future cases to build upon such cases by citing precedent however, this is not always the case.

Obiter Dictum is Latin for a statement by the way, it is a statement that is unrelated or part of law that is not an essential part of the Ratio Decidendi. Obiter Dicta can be made by way of illustration, argument or analogy.

These statements are not binding or do not form part of the final judgment although it can be used as a tool to persuade, it also can be taken in to consideration in later cases If the judge in the later case considers it appropriate. Obiter dicta are not the subject of the judicial decision, even if they happen to be correct statements of law but sometimes the courts reach decision by looking at obiter dicta of other cases.

An example of this is in the courts is that where the Court of Appeal followed the Obiter Dicta of the House of Lords in the case of R v Howe 1987 when deciding the case of R v Gotts 1992.

Bibliography

English legal system 4th edition, Jaqueline martin,. Hodder education.

English legal system 12th edition, slapper and Kelly.

Professor Cross defines this as “any rule expressed or implied treated by the judge as a necessary step in reaching his conclusion.” Professor Zander defines it “As a proportion of law which decides the case, in the light or the contexts of the material facts.”

Between the cases of Merritt v Merritt [1970] EWCA Civ 6 and Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571

New Legislation or directive

Jaqueline Martin, English Legal System, 4th edition, Hodder education, Pg 17

Central Asbestos v Dodd (and Smith) (1973) HL

[1932] UKHL 100

Slapper and Kelly, English legal system, 12th edition, Pg 141

Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130

R v Howe [1987] AC 417

R v Gotts (1992) 2 AC 412