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

Describe the operation of Judicial Precedent.B. Identify and explain the advantages and disadvantages of precedent as a system of law making

Extracts from this document...


In this essay I will be looking at the questions below which are: A. Describe the operation of Judicial Precedent. B. Identify and explain the advantages and disadvantages of precedent as a system of law making A. Describe the operation of Judicial Precedent. Answer: The operation of the Doctrine of judicial precedent is where the past decisions of the judges create law for future judges to follow. English precedent is based on the Latin, stare decisis, meaning stand by what has been decided. This system relies on the hierarchy of the courts. Every court is bound to follow any decision made by a court higher in the hierarchy and in general appellate courts are bound to follow their own decisions. At the top of the hierarchy is the European Court of Justice, this court only has jurisdiction over some areas of the law such as European law. ...read more.


Below the Court of Appeal are the divisional courts (Queen's Bench Division, Chancery Division and Family Division). The divisional courts have to follow their own decisions but again there are a few exceptions. Below the divisional courts are the High Court. The High Court has to follow all precedents of the higher courts and it binds the lower courts, it does not have to follow decisions but I generally does so. If the precedent was set by a court or higher status to the court deciding the new case, then the judges in the present case should follow the rule of law established in the earlier case. - But if the precedent is from a lower court in that hierarchy, the judge in the new case may not follow but will certainly consider it. ...read more.


The later court may confuse to follow the previous decisions. b) Fixity - if the previous court has an unjust decision, later court must follow so there's unjustices. c) Unconstitutionality - claims that judges do not make law, they only state the law. d) Arguments over whether the previous case even represents the new one can arise. The judge must decide on what happens in cases like these, as both parties (or even their lawyers) will not find common ground between which previous ruling represents the case as a whole. e) On the matter of previous ruling, there is a variety of cases that could apply. Some cases are even still in the progression stage therefore its rulings cannot be used until after the case is over. The judge has many cases to choose from to refer to and this could take a while - prolonging the court hearing and even resulting in witnesses to forget the event ?? ?? ?? ?? Dominique Howe Judicial Precedent 26th Jan 05 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree English Legal System 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 University Degree English Legal System essays

  1. Explain how the doctrine of precedents operates through the hierarchy of courts within the ...

    By distinguishing the previous case from the current case based on the significant facts a Judge can avoid applying the precedent. (Elliot & Quinn, (2009) English Legal System, 10th Edition Pearson and Longman pg: 20) Judges (of leading Courts) can overrule decisions made in lower Courts if it appears that the lower Court did not correctly apply the law.

  2. Law Making - Judicial Precedent.

    The ratio and the obiter are decided later by fellow judges, Barristers, Solicitors, legal academics, and students of law. Persuasive Judicial Precedent Where no binding precedent exists but a judge needs to reach a decision. E.g. a new piece of legislation being tested for the first time.

  1. Describe how the system of the judicial precedent operates - Discuss the advantages and ...

    At the top of the hierarchy is the European Court of Justice. It binds all English courts but does not bind itself with its own past decisions. The House of Lords is the highest court in England. At the end of the nineteenth century, in a case called London Street Tramways Co.

  2. Discuss the operation of the doctrine of precedent in the Australian courts

    With reference to cases discussed in the topic, a decision was taken which formed the precedent for the other cases to follow. In the Smith vs. Hughes case, the defendant declined the contract when he found that the oats sold were new.

  1. The system of judicial precedent permits both flexibility and flexibility in the law.

    So from 1966 the law had regained a degree of flexibility in its use of precedent Judges now have the possibility to make the law, as well as declare it, it is even possible to create new crimes. For example Shaw v DPP 1992 - corrupting public moral and R v R - marital rape.

  2. Discuss advantages and disadvantages of using the literal rule. Question . ...

    v. Payne 1866). An example of the rules application was in Evan v. Cross, where the defendant was charged with not heeding a law that referred to a list of road signs and similar things. It was held that white lines as road markings rather than road signs were not ejusdem generis with the signs.

  1. Sources of Law - Judicial precedent.

    Does the obiter dicta widen the ratio or give an alternative situation - Alternative, had there been no disclaimer then there would be a duty of care owed. Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees Housing Ltd (1947) - Contract Facts: By a lease under seal made on September

  2. “The system of Judicial Precedent permits both flexibility and stability in the law.” Explain ...

    decided that the landlord was entitled to the full rent as the war was over, and in his "obiter dicta" he speculated on what his decision may have been had the landlord tried to claim "back rent". He said that the landlord would have been estopped from claiming, and since

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