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

What is the doctrine of precedent

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

What is the doctrine of precedent? The doctrine of precedent is a form of reasoning and decision-making formed by case law. If a higher court has made a significant legal point in one case, it would be considered as binding in later courts. In order to understand this doctrine more clearly, it would be necessary to examine the hierarchy of the English Courts. The House of Lords holds the highest position, any decision made by them, would be binding to lower courts which filter down to the Court of Appeal, to the Crown Courts and County Courts. This is otherwise recognised as the doctrine of stare decisis, which means standing by what has been decided. This doctrine is a fundamental principle of English Law. The use of precedent is vital to the decision making process of the courts. ...read more.

Middle

This is evident in the earlier given example of Pickstone v. Freemans over "equal pay" and also in the case of Finnegan v, Clowney Youth Training Programme Ltd [1990] 2 All ER 546 on the retirement age for women under the Sex Discrimination Act 1976. Further to the point of the European Court of Justice, all English courts are required to be consistent with the jurisdiction laid down from U.K.'s membership to the E.U. particularly in relation to the Human Rights Act 1998. A persuasive precedent is different to a binding precedent in that the lower courts are unable to bind the higher courts to their decision, but can only be persuasive. As in the Mandla v. Dowell Lee case, we can identify how the House of Lords decision was swayed by the decision made in the Court of Appeal level in Australia. ...read more.

Conclusion

However, in attempt to overturn this principle, Lord Denning M.R. tried to make a House of Lords decision per incuriam. A previous court ruling can be labelled as per incuriam, i.e. the decision oversaw a number of significant material facts before submitting a legal rule. This attempt was made and condemned later in the House of Lords in Broome v. Cassell [1972] 2 Qb 354. Lord Denning M.R. tried to ignore the ratio in Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129 with the reasoning that there was a significant oversight made by the Law Lords. When this case reached the House of Lords, Lord Hailsham stated, "In the hierarchical system of courts which exists in this country, it is necessary for each lower tier, including the Court of Appeal, to accept loyally the decisions of the higher tiers". This affirms the doctrine of precedent that lower courts cannot overturn the precedent set out in higher courts. ...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. Law Making - Judicial Precedent.

    Most part time workers are woman. Part time workers were being sacked before full rights were achieved and so never did come into it. Didn't have dismissal rights. Delegated Legalisation Reasons for Delegated Legislation: - 1. Time The queen's speech sets out the typical plans of the government for the next parliamentary session.

  2. 'The scope of the flexibility of the doctrine of binding precedent has two sources; ...

    position to depart from decision they may not necessarily view as appropriate. This is a problem, not only for the reason given, but it also as so few cases actually reach the House of Lords that it shows reluctance on their part to consider the use of the Practice Statement(1966),

  1. Where judges do not follow precedent (or where they distinguish binding cases on dubious ...

    In calculating E's release date, the governor had taken account of time already spent in custody using a Home Office formula which the Divisional Court (departing from several previous decisions of its own) had subsequently held to be wrong. As a result, E had spent nearly two months longer in prison than she should have done.

  2. The ultra vires doctrine

    defining what is or is not a public authority, it does not necessarily mean that a whole range of bodies and institutions would be deprived of the ability to take human rights challenges themselves. The courts have juggled with the idea of whether a private body could be amendable by judicial review.

  1. The doctrine of Precedent.

    Persuasive precedent comes from a variety of different sources. The main ones within the English system are: * Obiter dicta statements by a higher ranking court, e.g. the Court of Appeal following obiter dicta of the House of Lords in R V Howe (1987)

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

    The common law principles were based on vicarious liability. This form of liability means legal responsibility of misconduct, no matter even if the person charged with misconduct, is not at fault. But some landmark cases have changed this situation, where the court has decided to interfere in contracts.

  1. Judicial Precedent

    Freemans over "equal pay" and also in the case of Finnegan v, Clowney Youth Training Programme Ltd (1990) on the retirement age for women under the Sex Discrimination Act 1976. Further to the point of the European Court of Justice, all English courts are required to be consistent with the jurisdiction laid down from U.K.'s membership to the E.U.

  2. Common Law, the Doctrine of Precedent and Statutory Interpretation in Australia

    precedent should be a higher court in the same legal system or hierarchy of courts the case is being presented before. This simply means that the doctrine of precedent is restricted by the legal system the court deciding the case is in.

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