Judicial Precedent Essay

It is often believed that the relationship between certainty and flexibility in judicial precedent has struck a fine line between being necessary and being precarious. The problem is that these two concepts of judicial precedent are seen as working against each other and not in tandem. There is proof, however, that as contrasting as they are on the surface they are actually working together to achieve one common goal.

a. Stare decisis is the legal principle of determining points in law according to precendets set by previous legal cases with similar conditions .

In legal models, the judge makes a decision based on facts and laws without considering how the decision may impact public policies. They may also utilize previous cases that have similarities to the current case in order to make a decision. This is useful because they may interpret the Constitution from different points of views of other justices or judges which had to make a decision on a past similar case (Video Engager). The only downside to this model is the fact that judges make decisions without

In addition, Case Law Reasoning was used to determine the outcome. Case Law Reasoning is when courts take prior cases, also known as precedents, and apply these cases to guide in the decision making processes. This application of taking prior cases to assist in the conclusion of current cases is known as stare decisis. Because case facts often vary, several cases are usually brought up to expand and make it possible to have a factual determination. In addition, several cases are brought up because moral ideas and the acceptance of such will change over time. Having

The rules of precedent themselves are judge made, except where a statute has intervened. Occasionally, judges have to decide on a case where there is

27). By following this doctrine of precedent, stare decisis, judges are bound to follow the ratio decidendi, the reasons given, for the rulings in previous cases from higher up in their jurisdictional hierarchy. Rulings from other jurisdictions can also be used as persuasive force and argument, as can the obiter dicta, the judges’ comments other than those given as the reason for the ruling. In this way Judge made law resolves conflict and injustice by ruling consistently with rulings made in previous, characteristically similar cases. An inconsistent approach to similar situations cannot equate to being fair, just or equitable. In this way the ALS is not biased or prejudice, is applied equally to all, and ensures that the law is based on fairness and justice.

* Case Law/Precedent/STARE DECISIS – Case Law is the doctrines and principles announced in cases. It governs all areas not covered by statutory law or administrative law and is part of our common law tradition. A Precedent is a decision that furnished an example of authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar legal principles or facts. For example, when a judge is making a ruling on a case, the judge may refer back to a similar case to see what the previous ruling was to keep the result similar. Stare Decisis is the practice of this process, deciding new cases with reference

Correct! This is the practice of using a case that has already been decided in a court of law (the precedent) as an analog or analogy to the case in question. If the case in question is sufficiently similar to the precedent, and the precedent stands on the authority of the court's ruling, then it may be argued, by analogy, that the case in question should receive the same ruling.

According to Author: Hon. John M. Walker, Jr., Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. " The American case system is based on the principle of stare decisis and the idea that like cases should be decided alike" What I take from this passage is the equal rights of decision making from both parties. The judge decide matters depending no external authority designates precedents. Most cases will fall under the stare decisis in some sense.

The last primary source of law is Case Law. Case law is laws created from former cases or existing laws (Sources of Law, 2017). Case law is rules created from court decisions. Case law, also be known as precedent or common law, is the body of prior judicial decisions that guide judges deciding issues before them. Depending on the relationship between the deciding court and the precedent, case law may be binding or merely persuasive (U.S. Case Law n.d.). An example of this law would be a civil suit. Case law is rules based on court decisions.

Many people think that the only people that can make a decision for them through a court case is a regular judge, many people don’t realize that theres many cases that has been brought up all the way to the Supreme Court. The judges in the Supreme Court are the highest judges in United States, Basically whatever these judges say is what’s going to happen, they can speak something among each other and make a final decision as one. Not any person can just get the job as a Supreme Court judge, these judges are nominated by the President, and confirmed with the advice of consent from the senate. The cases and hearing go from 7 to 8000 a year. The Supreme Court goes way back to 1935, they were at many different places during the war. It was first made in the Old Senate Chamber from 1861 to 1935.

R v A (No 2) was decided in 2001 within the House of Lords and involved a challenge under the Human Rights Act to the ‘rape shield’ section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act.

“The rules of precedent reflect the practice of the courts and have to be applied bearing in mind that their objective is to assist in the administration of justice. They are of considerable importance because of their role in achieving the appropriate degree of certainty as to the law. This is an important requirement of any system of justice. The principles should not however, be regarded as so rigid that they cannot develop in order to meet contemporary needs.”

Time-saving. Where principles have been established, cases with familiar facts are unlikely to go through a lengthy process of litigation. The main disadvantages of the doctrine of judicial precedent are; -

of it. "The law and the opinion of the judge may not always be one and the