- This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
- Posts
The ratio decidendi is the legal reason for the decision. It is capable of forming the binding precedent. It is a statement of law which is carried down to later decisions.
Obiter dicta are statements which are not part of the ratio, they are other statements made by the judges such as hypothetical situations or wide legal principles. They are persuasive rather than binding. This means that the judge can take the statement into account (and usually will) when reaching his decision, but he does not have to follow it.
Hey mike I could not understand these terms can u plz explain with help of an example ?
I think I do, within lectures
What you’ve written is just perfect and I don’t know that I could enlarge on that other than by maybe using different words!
Let me think about it and, when you’ve listened to the lecture on it and maybe still don’t understand any better, post again
Yes, I understood what you mean.
When a judge in court (and all of this is in lectures!) is beginning the process of passing his decision on a case, he can take days! (if not weeks) summarising the case as he / she sees it.
Now, clearly, all that chat from the judge cannot be fundamental to the decision that is reached. But that part of the summary that is based in law rather than interpretation of information given in the process of the hearing will be the basis of the judge’s final decision. It could be the similarity of the circumstances of the case with a previous binding precedent or the application of a particular section from statute that persuades the judge that this is the decision he shall reach.
But it’s taken days to arrive at and pronounce that decision in the court.
Now it cannot be the case that everything that is said in the judge’s summary is fundamental to the decision. Only that part that caused the judge to reach that decision (the rationale of the decision or ratio decidendi) is binding on subsequent judges in courts of equal or lower statusThe rest of the many days’ chat is obiter (not orbiter!) – not binding, but persuasive
Can I give you a specific example? No! That’s why I didn’t when you first posted the question on this thread.
You can only accept the generality of the principle of ratio and obiter. Try to imagine an exam question in this area. What’s the worst that the examiner can ask? He’s not going to ask you for an example of ratio nor obiter! Accept the principle and don’t worry about the minutiae of the specifics
OK?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.