Law is a set of rules. Law can be utilized to anyone and is to restrict the human. The Malaysian Judicial System is based on the English legal system which succeeded by the history of the British. Malaysian Judicial System set for the cases like criminal and civil litigation. Litigation is a court process of starting and sustain or protecting a legal action. The Malaysian court system have both criminal and civil jurisdiction. They have power and have to be responsibility to hear certain cases. The court was constituted by statute under Part IX of the Constitution. The higher court will hear and make decision on the more important or serious cases. The Malaysia judicial power is fixed in the hierarchy of courts which have Superior Courts, Subordinate
…show more content…
The advantages are certainty, practicality and flexibility. Certainty is one of the greatest advantages of the doctrine. The people can aim their actions with faith with the results in greater certainty. For the practicality, the law evolved was ground on reality instead of theoretical conditions. With there is still an adaptability that the judges can prevent from following previous cases if it had been settled incaution or by distinguishing precedents while the higher courts restrict the lower courts with its decision. The first disadvantages of doctrine of binding judicial precedent is rigidity. A lower courts must follow a prior precedent even it is wrong and also the cases may not go on for appeal to a higher court. The chances of amending the previous result may be lost and the judges must give a good reason for denying the previous precedents. The other disadvantages is hard to determine the ratio decidendi as there may be more than one ratio decidendi. So, this makes the judges very difficult to discover the right ratio decidendi. In the cases Rickards v Lothian (1913), the judges give more than one ratio decidendi. There is hundreds of judgement are made every year. The massive and rising of number in cases become a main problem with the doctrine and the complexity of the law. This let the important authority unintentionally be
The advantages are certainty, practicality and flexibility. Certainty is one of the greatest advantages of the doctrine. The people can aim their actions with faith with the results in greater certainty. For the practicality, the law evolved was ground on reality instead of theoretical conditions. With there is still an adaptability that the judges can prevent from following previous cases if it had been settled incaution or by distinguishing precedents while the higher courts restrict the lower courts with its decision. The first disadvantages of doctrine of binding judicial precedent is rigidity. A lower courts must follow a prior precedent even it is wrong and also the cases may not go on for appeal to a higher court. The chances of amending the previous result may be lost and the judges must give a good reason for denying the previous precedents. The other disadvantages is hard to determine the ratio decidendi as there may be more than one ratio decidendi. So, this makes the judges very difficult to discover the right ratio decidendi. In the cases Rickards v Lothian (1913), the judges give more than one ratio decidendi. There is hundreds of judgement are made every year. The massive and rising of number in cases become a main problem with the doctrine and the complexity of the law. This let the important authority unintentionally be