Precedent

• Stare Decisis


  To stand by what has been decided
• Ratio Decidendi


  The reason for the decision
• Obiter Dicta


  Other things said
• The Practice Statement


  How the Supreme Court avoid precedent
• Per Incurium


  Made in error
• Distinguishing


  Refuses to follow the past case because of a difference in facts. Merritt v Merritt. R v Wilson
• Reversing


  A higher court doesn't follow a lower courts decision. Sweet v Parsley. Gillick v West Norfolk NHS
• Overruling


  A higher court does not follow the decision of a lower court in a past case. Hadley Byrne v Heller. A v Hoare
• Young v Bristol Aeroplanes


  How the Court of Appeal avoid following precedent
• Persuasive precedent

  Precedent that doesn't have to be followed. Lower courts: R v R. Obiter Dicta R v Gotts. Dissenting judgements Henley Byrne v Heller. Other countries R v Bentham
• Original precedent


  The first decision in that area of law. Donoghue v Stevenson. Gillick v West Norfolk NHS
• Binding precedent


  Precedent that does have to be followed. R v Gotts
• R v Howe


  Duress is not a defence to murder
• R v Brown


  Consent is only available as a defence to assault and battery, not ABH
• R v Wilson


  Consent can be a defence to tattooing and other related acts
• R v Gotts


  Duress not available for attempted murder (following the obiter dicta from Howe)
• Gillick v West Norfolk 


  If it is in the best interests and welfare of the child, the Doctor is under no obligation to inform parents
• Donoghue v Stevenson


  Created the neighbour in law principle
• R v R


  The HofL agreed with the CofA ruling that a man could be guilty of raping his wife
• Hedley Byrne v Heller

  The House of Lords chose to follow the dissenting judgement of Lord Denning in Candler v Crane
• Wagon Mound


  The Privy Council decided the rules on remoteness in tort law
• R v Bentham


  Judges considered a number of American legal authorities regarding gun possession
• Price v Leeds City Council


  The ECtHR is only persuasive precedent
• BRB v Herrington


  The HofL used the practice statement to overrule Addie v Dumbrek deciding that a duty can be owed to child trespassers
• R v Shivpuri


  The HofL used the practice statement and overruled the decision in Anderton v Ryan to allow someone to be found guilty of attempting the impossible
• A v Hoare


  The HofL used the practice statement to overrule Stubbings v Webb stating that in cases of sexual offences there is no time limit for claiming damages
• Austin v Southwark LBC


  The practice statement now applies to the Supreme Court
• David v Johnson


  The HofL confirmed the CofA is justified in refusing to follow its own past decisions in rare instances if the case involved a manifest error
• Rickards v Rickards


  The CofA did have the jurisdiction to hear the appeal as the earlier decision was per incurium
• R v Gould


  The CofA's use of avoiding precedent when a decision was per incurium was confirmed
• Sweet v Parsley


  The HofL reversed the decision of the CofA by stating that the D required knowledge of the activity to be convicted
• Merritt v Merritt


  Was distinguished from Balfour v Balfour because the agreement was written in a divorce it was intended to be legally binding