precedent and the status of the court of appeal

The doctrine of judicial precedent has been at the heart of the English legal system being a form of certainty for judges to follow long standing precedent which in fact, only slowly evolved and nurtured. Judicial precedent refers to the hierarchical structure of the English courts within which a decision of a higher court will be binding on a court lower in the hierarchy. However, there have been occasions where the Court of Appeal departed from the decisions of the House of Lords this has been treated with hostility by the Supreme Court.

The Court of Appeal is bound by decisions of the House of Lords even if it considers them to be wrong. It was also bound by its own decision, however in Young v Bristol Aeroplane, the Court of Appeal held that it was bound by its own previous decisions subject to three exceptions. Firstly, when there are two conflicting decisions, the Court of Appeal must decide which to follow and which to reject. Such a situation arose in the case of Tiverton estates v Wearwell. In this case, the court decided to follow previous decisions rather than the inconsistent decisions of Law v Jones.
Secondly, where a decision of its own has been impliedly overruled by the House of Lords. In the case of Family Housing Association v Jones, the Court of Appeal was obliged to ignore its previous decision in the distinction of lease and license in property law. Although the cases were not expressly overruled, its was in conflict with House of Lord’s decision in the case of AG securities v Vaugh and Street v Mountford.

Finally it can also depart from its previous decision if the previous decision was given per incuriam. Like in the case of Williams v Fawcett, there were material irregulation for which the order would be quashed. Previous decisions were per incuriam the error had been compounded by a line of cases, and this was an exceptional case.

The Court of Appeal can also disregards its previous decisions and also disregards its previous