Judicial precedent is a practice within the common law system of England and Wales where judges are obligated to refer to, and can be bound to apply the same ratio decidendi meaning “reason for the decision” from, decisions made in past cases when deciding current cases with similar facts. A key component of the practice of judicial precedent is the principle of stare decisis, meaning “let the decision stand”. The principle is comprised of two requirements; a decision by a superior court is binding upon itself and any inferior courts in the hierarchy, and that precedents are only overturned by a superior court. (The Open University, 2015)
There are a number of advantages and disadvantages to the practice of judicial precedent, especially in …show more content…
The rigidity with which it was historically expected to be applied, as noted in The London Tramways Company v The London County Council [1898] AC 375, would today be a severe impediment to justice. However, as demonstrated by the Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) and Young, the system is able to recognise its own inherent inadequacies, seize opportunities to evolve the law, and put in place measures to address those inadequacies.
Disadvantages
Inflexibility
The requirement for inferior courts to apply the precedent of superior courts, even when justice would be better served by a different decision, creates a situation where injustices may occur, for instance as a result of changes in societal attitudes over time. This results in leaving a petitioner with their only option being expending large amounts of time and money in appeals to superior courts.
Complexity
The vast amount of interlinked case law generated brings with it an exceptional degree of complexity. This problem is further compounded by the often unclear nature of the ratio decidendi recorded by judges sometimes making it impossible for even trained law professional to understand. Increased complexity moves the accessibility of the law, for the average citizen, out of reach forcing the use intermediaries to aid
There are a number of advantages and disadvantages to the practice of judicial precedent, especially in …show more content…
The rigidity with which it was historically expected to be applied, as noted in The London Tramways Company v The London County Council [1898] AC 375, would today be a severe impediment to justice. However, as demonstrated by the Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) and Young, the system is able to recognise its own inherent inadequacies, seize opportunities to evolve the law, and put in place measures to address those inadequacies.
Disadvantages
Inflexibility
The requirement for inferior courts to apply the precedent of superior courts, even when justice would be better served by a different decision, creates a situation where injustices may occur, for instance as a result of changes in societal attitudes over time. This results in leaving a petitioner with their only option being expending large amounts of time and money in appeals to superior courts.
Complexity
The vast amount of interlinked case law generated brings with it an exceptional degree of complexity. This problem is further compounded by the often unclear nature of the ratio decidendi recorded by judges sometimes making it impossible for even trained law professional to understand. Increased complexity moves the accessibility of the law, for the average citizen, out of reach forcing the use intermediaries to aid