- This topic has 11 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by
.
- Posts
I want to ask a question that is , what is the difference between case law and precedent and what is the definition of case law
Case law is judge made law which is based on underling principle consistency, incorporates judges’ decision under common law and equity.
Precedent is previous judges’ decision binds court to follow.
well if both are decisions then what is the difference. If we take an illustration as A & B enter a contract B commits breach of contract, the judge gives his decision now in this illustration what will be case law and precedent.
Case law includes decisions ie precedents under common law and equity. However, precedent means one decision which binds court to follow.
Case law simply refers to disputes which are settled by the legal system through the workings of the Courts. Each dispute is called a case.
When judges are deciding which party should “win” a case, they have to follow ( with certain exceptions! ) the previous decisions made by judges in earlier case dispute resolution where the facts of the recent case are sufficiently similar to the facts of the earlier case. The principle is called “judicial precedent” and a past exam question read “Judicial precedent is the cornerstone of English Law. Discuss”
This earlier judge’s decision is broken down into two elements – ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. It is only the ratio which is binding on later judges in later similar cases. Obiter is merely persuasive – but not binding.
So – “case law” refers to cases brought before the Courts
Precedent is the principle which makes judges follow the principles of law established in earlier similar cases.
Does that help?
@werty said:
Case law simply refers to disputes which are settled by the legal system through the workings of the Courts. Each dispute is called a case.When judges are deciding which party should “win” a case, they have to follow ( with certain exceptions! ) the previous decisions made by judges in earlier case dispute resolution where the facts of the recent case are sufficiently similar to the facts of the earlier case. The principle is called “judicial precedent” and a past exam question read “Judicial precedent is the cornerstone of English Law. Discuss”
This earlier judge’s decision is broken down into two elements – ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. It is only the ratio which is binding on later judges in later similar cases. Obiter is merely persuasive – but not binding.
So – “case law” refers to cases brought before the Courts
Precedent is the principle which makes judges follow the principles of law established in earlier similar cases.
Does that help?
I have few questions regarding your above reply
1. What is meant by dispute resolution?
2. While mentioning judicial precedent you have mentioned “decision”, is this final decision of the case or decision of the judge on a fact please clarify.
3. Are case law and precedent principally the same things i.e case law is broad and precedent is part of it?1. Dispute resolution means resolving a dispute (or putting an end to it) by arriving at a decision.
2. I’m not sure what exactly you mean by the second question but I guess a judge’s decision is always a final decision unless the concerned parties are unsatisfied with it and file an appeal in the superior courts. So if this decision is given say in the Crown Court, the concerned parties (if unsatisfied) may file an appeal in the High Court..
3. case law means reported decisions of appeals courts and other courts which make new interpretations of the law and, therefore, can be cited as precedents.
The rulings in trials and hearings which are not appealed and not reported are not case law and, therefore, not precedent or new interpretations.Please correct me tutor if I’m wrong
1. Dispute resolution means resolving a dispute (or putting an end to it) by arriving at a decision.
2. I’m not sure what exactly you mean by the second question but I guess a judge’s decision is always a final decision unless the concerned parties are unsatisfied with it and file an appeal in the superior courts. So if this decision is given say in the Crown Court, the concerned parties (if unsatisfied) may file an appeal in the High Court..
3. case law means reported decisions of appeals courts and other courts which make new interpretations of the law and, therefore, can be cited as precedents.
The rulings in trials and hearings which are not appealed and not reported are not case law and, therefore, not precedent or new interpretations.Please correct me tutor if I’m wrong.
I can go along with that although I’m not really sure what on earth alinou….. is asking – “What is dispute resolution?”!!!! Is the resolution of a dispute. What sort of explanation is necessary?
Yes, case law is the name given to reported cases and so non-reported cases are presumably never quoted as examples or precedent in later cases.
Yea, you are right Werty. Even I’m a bit unclear regarding alinouman’s qns. Just hope that our answers clear his doubts..:)
Thanks all of you for spending your valuable time to answer me. Let me tell you what i have understood about case law and precedent till date
CASE LAW
It is judge made law consisting of decisions made in the courts.PRECEDENT
It is judge’s judgement on facts in a case. Binding precedent should form part of ratio and precedents forming part of obiter are not binding. binding precedent is regarding proposition of law not on question of fact i.e if in a case there are two judgements by the judge one on proposition of law and other on question of fact. The judgement regarding proposition of law is ratio and thus binding precedent where as judgement on question of fact is obiter and not binding. There may be more than one precedent from a previous case.Now this is what i have understood till date.Correct me if I am wrong
@alinoumanmemon said:
Thanks all of you for spending your valuable time to answer me. Let me tell you what i have understood about case law and precedent till dateCASE LAW
It is judge made law consisting of decisions made in the courts.PRECEDENT
It is judge’s judgement on facts in a case. Binding precedent should form part of ratio and precedents forming part of obiter are not binding. binding precedent is regarding proposition of law not on question of fact i.e if in a case there are two judgements by the judge one on proposition of law and other on question of fact. The judgement regarding proposition of law is ratio and thus binding precedent where as judgement on question of fact is obiter and not binding. There may be more than one precedent from a previous case.Now this is what i have understood till date.Correct me if I am wrong
That’s correct! 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.