What is the doctrine of judicial precedent? Must judges in all circumstances follow legal precedent?

The first 200 words of this essay...

What is the doctrine of judicial precedent? Must judges in all circumstances follow legal precedent?

The doctrine of judicial precedent is that, to make common law fair, judges in their rulings, should follow past decisions made by other judges, in similar cases. This is based on the maxim 'stare decisis et non quieta movere' which means 'stand by what has been decided and do not unsettle the established'. This creates fairness and provides certainty in the law. Judicial precedent is known as 'the tool of common law'. It is one of common law's main sources. Although judicial precedent is known as 'judge made law', judges follow judicial precedent to avoid making new law. If judges frequently made law instead of enforcing it, we would not have a democracy in Britain. Judges want to protect democracy and them making law could lead to a dictatorship.

Judges' at the end of a case explain their decision in a speech, as precedent can only operate of the legal reasons for past decisions are known. These speeches are recorded and stored in the All England Law Reports. These Law reports are made into thick books, which judges in future cases can