Importance Of Ratio

Decent Essays
The ratio decidendi (ratio) is the legal rule or principle that arises from a court’s decision that also encapsulates the reasoning behind the rule. The ratio from a case is binding on later cases in lower courts through the doctrine of precedence; a ratio from a case must be used in similar cases that come before lower courts later on. Ratios can be stated broadly or narrowly and this determines the scope of the ratio and outcome of later cases. In my view, it is better to have a ratio that is stated broadly. Although there are advantages and disadvantages to both broad and narrow ratios, a broader scope allows application to a greater range of fact situations and will be easier to evolve and modernize, as demonstrated by some major cases …show more content…
A broad ratio can be applied to many different fact situations that have similar material facts as the case at hand. With broader terms forming the ratio, more cases will fall under the legal principle that it stands for. An example of this would be Donoghue v Stevenson, where Lord Atkin’s ratio stated that a manufacturer has the duty of care to ensure that their products do not cause harm to the user. This ratio was stated very broadly and could be applied to all products, not just ginger beer specifically, nor is it limited to only food and drink as Lord Macmillan suggested in his judgment. In the later case Grant v Australian Knitting Mills Ltd, a customer bought undergarments that caused rashes. The principle from Donoghue v Stevenson was taken and applied. The court found that Australian Knitting Mills had a duty ensure that their product would not harm the consumer, which went on to further develop in consumer rights under the common law. The broad scope of the Donoghue v Stevenson ratio allows for easily application to future cases. Having flexibility in a ratio allows the common law to modernize and evolve much more easily; its applicability to a range of cases means that judges can apply the ratio to later cases, but also able to modify the ratio to suit current societal …show more content…
The ratio would become a mere individual application instead of creating precedence. The courts will be able to distinguish cases based on different issues or material facts from the precedent. Different outcomes may be reached if the material facts differ even slightly. This is undesirable as law should be consistent and predictable, hence why we have the doctrine of precedence. If a ratio is too fact specific it would be impossible for it to form the basis of useable precedence; it would be very rare for another case to come up that is so similar and hence the ratio would essentially be unusable. Using the example of Donoghue v Stevenson again, had the ratio been “a manufacturer of ginger beer must take care to ensure that no snails may enter and contaminating the product which would cause the consumer to become ill”, it would be near impossible to apply to subsequent cases. The chances of another case arising with the same material facts as Donoghue v Stevenson would be extremely slim and therefore stare decisis would be very difficult to operate with this ratio. If a narrow ratio of Donoghue v Stevenson had been used, negligence under the common law would have also developed much slower. Cases concerning negligence in products would have had to either been under an existing category where duty of care was owed such as ropes or shampoo or any product where the consumer and producer

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Argument Against Cardoza

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    I will then explain both Cardoza’s and Andrew’s views with reference to negligence and duty of care, which are most relevant in this case. I will explain why Cardoza’s decision may be considered incorrect or questionable. In the case of Palsgraf vs Long Island R.R. Co, the plaintiff, Palsgraf, was waiting on the platform waiting for her train. A man, carrying a package, was hurrying to catch his train.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Current state of wrongful dismissal in Employment Law and why we believe it needs to be changed. The current state of wrongful dismissal is that damages are awarded based on what notice of lieu an employer/employee receives (Richard A. Yates, 2011). Weakness for employee: • Not compensated for pain and suffering, only awarded difference of notice they should have received and benefits/pension they would have received (Richard A. Yates, 2011).…

    • 1173 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The critical implications of the decision of Haque & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 1765 (2 July 2015) in terms of the binding nature of opinions of Medical Officers of the Commonwealth (“MOC”) appointed by the Minister, are as it is stated in regulation 2.25A of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) the (“Regulations”). In that the opinion of the MOC is to be taken as to be correct in determining whether a person meets the requirements of Public Interest Criteria (“PIC”) 4005. The delegate of the Minister is not to form their own opinion on whether or not an applicant meets the requirements of PIC 4005.…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The case of Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. v. Saskatchewan, 2005 SCC 13, [2005] 1S.C.R. 188 is considered very controversial as it questions the national public health concern that is caused by the smoke of tobacco and can affect our youth in a negative way. What this cases focuses on is s. 6 of the Saskatchewan Tobacco Control act and how by the virtue of the paramountcy doctrine is inoperative due to the fact of s. 30 of the federal tobacco Act. The doctrine of paramountcy establishes that where there is a conflict between valid provincial and the federal law or its purpose, the federal law will prevail. Furthermore, s. 30 of the federal tobacco act allows retail stores to display tobacco and tobacco product-related brand elements and post…

    • 2032 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The rule in all civil actions the standard of proof required is always the balance of probabilities. However, some cases have created ambiguity by suggesting that where there is an element of criminal activity. This can require a higher quality of evidence to tip the balance. Despite authority that firmly rejects the notion of an intermediate standard, there is a body of case law that implies where criminal behaviour is averred the Standard of proof is of a different quality if it is to succeed. Judicial dicta contribute to this ambiguity creating the perception of an intermediate standard.…

    • 1066 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Parties: Ms. Palsgraf Long Island Railroad Co. Two employees Man catching the train carrying the unknown fireworks Issue: How is the duty of care determined for Ms. Palsgraf safety while on the platform of the train station? Does the Long Island Railroad Co. owe that duty to Ms. Palsgraf? Is the Log Island Railroad Co. responsible for the actual and proximate case of Ms. Palsgraf injuries?…

    • 782 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In the case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood, all four of these factors are relevant. The first factor, the state of the legal rules that the Court interprets, means that justices must interpret existing laws and we see this in Casey v. Planned Parenthood. The majority opinion adheres to the rule of stare decisis and this case upheld the Court’s prior ruling in Roe v. Wade. Each Justice, in his or her own way, interpreted past laws and cases to make their decision. The second factor, the justices’ personal views, is very surprising in this certain case.…

    • 1496 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    1) Legal 2) Attitudinal 3) Strategic With the vague words of the constitution and these 3 models this is how the Supreme Court justices are to make decisions. 1) The legal aspect of the decision-making is strictly based on the facts, laws & precedent.…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    There have been many influences on Canadian law including Hammurabi, Mosaic, and Roman. Britain has had the most influence on Canadian law. Although there have been many influences on Canada 's legal system, Britain has had the most impact for reasons such as Trial by Combat and Ordeal, Common Law, Rule of Law and the British North American Act of 1867. The impact that the Hammurabi laws have had on Canada 's legal system today is that the laws are known, along with the hierarchy of laws.…

    • 1277 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Deference

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Introduction This paper is based on varied literature including journal articles, research papers, online resources, edited books, etc. The main focus of this paper is to examine the UK courts procedure in relation to the concept of deference with regards section 3 and section 4 of the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998, it’s limitations and the essence of judicial deference to legislation and the interference of Parliamentary supremacy. In addition, it would be potent to highlight ‘the judicial approach to the scheme of the HRA particularly the interpretation and application of the interpretive obligation laid down in s 3 and the power to declare legislation incompatible under s4 as well as the construction by the judiciary of a principle of deference’…

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The courts then formed a test called the test of proportionality. This test was originally created by Lord Hope in the case of Kebeline but it was amplified in Lambert and was explained further in Brown v Scott . The test holds three limbs which are, what the prosecution must prove in order for the burden to shift to the accused, what is the burden of the accused and what is the nature of the threat to society which the Act in question is trying to prevent. If the reverse burden given to the accused will achieve the aim or objective of the Act in consideration, the reversal of burden will take place.…

    • 2682 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Dworkin on Judicial Discretion in “Hard Cases” Lu Zhao Boyu (Bozy) | A0127866R In the standard courtroom, one could reasonably expect the judge to be the one responsible for the holding of a case. However, does and should the judge exercise his own discretion when deciding cases? Prominent legal theorist H. L. A. Hart claims that judges do exercise discretion, especially in “hard cases”, where there is no pre-existing or unambiguous rule. To this matter, Hart’s brilliant student Ronald Dworkin offers an alternative theory, which argues that judges do not have discretion and should follow principles instead of rules, even in “hard cases”.…

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Common Law And Islamic Law

    • 1494 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Stare decisis means the use of precedents when making legal decisions. This is found in common law system but not in civil and Islamic law systems (Opolot, 1980). Stare decisis allows judges to look back at past cases and make their judgment based on the outcome of the past case (Darbyshire, 2001). Stare decicis forms a precedent that is to be used from that moment forward (Opolot, 1980). In civil law system judges are not to look back at past cases to render their decisions.…

    • 1494 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    EXPLAIN THE MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF ENGLAND AND WALES AND THOSE OF CIVIL LAW COUNTRIES AND EXPLAIN THE MERITS AND PROBLEMS OF THESE LEGAL SYSTEMS A HISTORY OF TWO TYPES OF LAW The two main systems of law in the world today are common law and civil law. The system used in England and Wales is common law which has an evolving history dating from the Norman conquest of England in 1066 and the local customs of the Anglo-Saxons. English common law spread throughout the world during the growth of the British empire between the 16th and 18th centuries.…

    • 1466 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The role of Judges in our court system is one of the most important roles within our relative communities, they are the main point of interpretation when it comes to the law. Be it civil or criminal, they assess the evidence, and hopefully have an unbiased mind towards the pursuit of justice. Despite legislature being made through Parliament, Judges are able to teach the people through the means of precedent what laws actually mean. They help the general public to know to what extent they are abiding by the law and punishable offences under the law. The question that is being asked is whether or not Judges have the right to be creative in their rulings, or should they simply apply the law just the way it is?…

    • 1112 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays