Supreme court and judicial precent

Two different questions here!

The Supreme Court, until very recently, was known as “The House of Lords” sitting in its judicial capacity, and not to be confused with the House of Lords sitting in its legislative capacity. Th Lords in the judicial role were all entitled to sit in the Upper House of Parliament ( and not, therefore in the House of Commons – the Lower House.

Judicial precedent, in essence, states that ” In a similar earlier case than the case currently under consideration, the decision from the earlier case is binding on the judge of this current case” there are exceptions where the earlier decision is NOT binding and therefore “precedent” does not need to be followed – but they are exceptions.

Precedent gives a degree of certainty to legal principles in that, if a principle is established by an earlier case, and it is found to be binding, then the later case MUST follow that precedent.

However, as already stated, there are exceptions. These you can easily look up in your study text!