Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2

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. The ultra vires doctrine

    In subsection (3) "Parliament" does not include the House of Lords in its judicial capacity. (5) In relation to a particular act, a person is not a public authority by virtue only of subsection (3)(b) if the nature of the act is private.

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

    The following case was dealt according to the doctrine of unconscionability. The jurisdiction is long established as extending generally to circumstances in which > A party to a transaction was under a special disability in dealing with the other party with the consequence that there was an absence of any reasonable degree of equality between them.

  1. The doctrine of Precedent.

    The ruling in London Tramways v London County Council had the effect of making the law to rigid. 4. In 1966 the Lord Chancellor issued the Practice Statement giving the House of Lords flexibility to depart from past decisions.

  2. Law Making - Judicial Precedent.

    Golden Rule Advantage - Should avoid absurdity and injustice Disadvantage - Absurdity isn't defined 3. Mischief Rule Advantage - Tackles specific purpose of statute - the mischief itself Disadvantage - Modern statutes are written in less and less detail (may not clearly be able to identify mischief)

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

    Lord Scarman took a different approach, and said there was a general legal principle that tortfeasors were liable for the forseeable consequences of their acts: it was foreseeable that P would suffer psychological injury in these circumstances, and that was enough.

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

    of the earlier case should be viewed.5 The obiter dicta/dictum is something said by a judge while giving judgment that was not essential to the decision in the case. It does not form part of the ratio decidendi of the case therefore not binding precedent.

  1. Judicial Precedent

    and its decisions bind all other courts in the English legal system. The debate about the House of Lords is the extent to which it should follow its own past decisions. The critical date in this argument is 1966 as before then the House of Lords was bound by its

  2. Judicial Precedent

    For example, Gomez followed the precedent held in Morris over appropriation in theft. The legal rule may also have been formed in the same level of court, as in the case of Regina v. Mazo (1997) and Regina v. Hinks (1998), where there were conflicting ratios made within the Court of Appeal over consent and appropriation.

  • Over 180,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work

Marked by a teacher

This essay has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read the full teachers notes when you download the essay.

Peer reviewed

This essay has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay reviewing squad. Read the full review on the essay page.

Peer reviewed

This essay has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay reviewing squad. Read the full review under the essay preview on this page.