Preview

Explain Judicial Precedent and the Types of Precedent

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
471 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Explain Judicial Precedent and the Types of Precedent
Judicial Precedent means the process whereby judges follow the decisions made by previous judges in similar cases where the facts are of sufficient similarity. In deciding a case, there will be basic tasks, establishing what the facts are, meaning what actually happened, as well as how the law applies to those facts. The idea of judicial precedent is that once a decision has been made in a set of particular facts, similar facts in later cases should be treated in the same way. The rules concerning which courts are bound by which are known as the rules of judicial precedent, or stare decisis, this may provide consistency and predictability in the law.

The decision made by the judges, also known as judgment, in which containing the explanation of the legal principles on which the judges has made a decision, this is called the ratio decidendi, in Latin stands for ‘reason for a decision’. The judges may speculate his decisions would or might have been if the facts are different, it includes the judges thought processes, this is called obiter dicta, in Latin stands for ‘things said by the way’.

If there are similar facts in a case, the judges may choose to follow the decisions made in previous cases as to produce a decision, or to distinguish the facts, see if they are different from those of the previous one, the judges may choose not following the earlier one. The judges may overrule the previous decision if they disagree with it and was made in a lower court, however, it is only used warily because it may weaken the authority and respect of the lower courts. Besides of overrule, the judges may also reverse the earlier decision unless he thinks that the law applied in the previous case is misinterpreted.

There are different types of precedent, basically it can be divided as 3 types, which are binding, persuasive and original precedent. All judicial decisions in a specific court’s jurisdiction heard at that court’s level or higher are considered to be binding

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions…

    • 1942 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    Precedents are a past case that is used as an example or as guidance as it has similar facts and circumstances. There are 3 types of Precedents; Original, Binding and Persuasive. They can be used instead of statutory laws in civil cases. They are created when a new case, which has never been trialled in the UK courts. An example of this was the London bombings in 2005. The rulings for this trial will now be applied to future cases, similar to this. Judges look at a previous case, which is similar and in an equal or higher court and they will then use this information to decide…

    • 1917 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Legal Studies VCE Unit 2

    • 342 Words
    • 2 Pages

    It develops through the doctrine of precedent where the reasons for decisions of courts are followed by future courts.…

    • 342 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Chapter One Review

    • 599 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It means to stand on decided cases. It is a judge made law and each decision becomes precedent. Courts are obliged to follow binding precedents within their jurisdiction. In first impression cases a court may refer to public policy, or widely held social values to make a decision.…

    • 599 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Week1 Busn 420

    • 350 Words
    • 2 Pages

    At the heart of the common law system is the doctrine of stare decisis, which translates to “let the decision stand.” Stare decisis creates precedent and thus, when a court has decided a case in a particular way, future cases should be decided the same way. However, stare decisis will only apply if the facts of the case are substantially similar to the prior case. Precedent acts as a major guide for judges when hearing similar cases.…

    • 350 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Best Essays

    Stare Decisis Case Summary

    • 1250 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In the interest of preserving the respect for the rule of law and cabin judicial discretion a principle of Stare decisis must be applied. This foundational principle in the U.S. legal system sets a base for favoring the adherence to precedent in order to establish a consistent and stable courtroom climate.…

    • 1250 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Better Essays

    MGMT 217

    • 2186 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Doctrine where the law of precedent is used in guiding decision making in present cases before the court…

    • 2186 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Business Law Quiz

    • 1491 Words
    • 6 Pages

    | Incorrect. The use of precedent--the doctrine of stare decisis --permits a predictable, relatively quick, and fair resolution of cases. Under this doctrine, a court must adhere to principles of law established by higher courts.…

    • 1491 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Precedent-a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive ruling…

    • 523 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    paralegal

    • 1529 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Precedent is prior decisions of the same court or a higher court that a judge must follow. Stare decisis “ Stand by the thing decided” Related to the concept of precedent; Rule that a court should apply the same legal principle to the same set of facts and apply it to later cases that are similar…

    • 1529 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Lower courts are bound to follow decision of superior courts regardless whether of the Judge believes a decision is correct…

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Precedent generally refers to some prior action that guides what is done with the action today. As the judges decisions were recorded and passed around, this lead to more continuity and predictability with verdicts in court by judges. As this took place not every case had to be heard if there was an earlier decision on the issue. They referred back to the earlier decision for the case without hearing the current case.…

    • 728 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case 1: Mahe Vs. Alberta

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Requirement 1: The definition of precedent is an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent or similar circumstances. Requirement 2: Case 1: Mahe v. Alberta Summary: The Mahe v. Alberta case is on the concept of language rights. The ruling is notable, as the court established that section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees minority language education rights to French-speaking communities outside Quebec.…

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The best way that I can think of to describe precedent is that if someone went to prison for stealing now, but a case from the past is brought up where someone committed the same exact crime but did not get a prison term, this case could be brought up as precedent in order to change the prison sentencing(Miller &…

    • 375 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Judicial precedent in its broad definition is the process by which judges follow previously decided cases to aid in their decision providing that the facts are sufficiently similar. The doctrine of judicial precedent seeks to provide consistency and predictability in law by virtue of the application of the principle of stare decisis which means to stand by the decided. Through the application of this maxim, judicial precedent ensures inferior courts are bound to apply the legal principles which were set down in the decisions made by superior courts. The decision of a judge may fall into two parts, ratio decidendi and obiter dictum. The ratio decidendi is the reason for the decision and it is the principle of law on which a particular decision is made. When a judge has come to a decision he outlines the facts which he finds has been proved on evidence, he then applies the laws to those facts and arrives at his decision for which he gives a reason; this reason is the ratio decidendi. Therefore it is important to note that, it is not necessarily the decision which is of utmost importance in judicial precedence but the reason for arriving at the decision. The ratio decinidi is not as clear cut as it sounds though as there are a number of instances where the ruling judge does not explicitly say what the ratio decidendi is and it is sometimes left for a later judge to determine and this is an issue in and of itself as there maybe disagreements as to what the reason actually is. The obiter dictum on the other hand is speculation so to speak. This is where…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays