- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
There are some basic rules governing the application of the principle of judicial precedent. Which of the following is not one of those rules?
A. any similarity in cases should be points of law and not necssarily matters of fact.
B. the precedent must be part of the ratio decidendi from a previous case
C. the ratio decidendi must be from a case heard in a superior court or court of same standing
D. any similarity in cases should be matters of fact and not necessarily points of lawDear sir,
I know that for judicial precedent,
– the decision should be based on point of law not point of fact
– material facts of each case must be same / similar
– preceding court superior/ equal
– part of the ratio decidendi of the caseNow B and C is not the answer because it’s true.. but I’m not sure about A and D. If material facts of each case must be same/similar, then D would be correct.. And A would be the answer
but then decisions should be based on points of law, then A is correct and D would be the answer..?
The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on stare decisis (standing by previous decisions) Once a point of law has been decided in a particular case, that law must be applied in all future cases containing the same material facts
So, in answer to your question, option A is the correct choice – ie once you have established that the facts of a later case are similar to the facts of an earlier case, the court hearing the later case is bound to follow the precedent set by the earlier case
OK?
- The topic ‘Judicial precedent’ is closed to new replies.