Courts and precedent

• Supreme court 

  Until 1966, the House of Lords was bound by its previous decisions. After 1966, a Practice statement was issued stating it was okay to depart from previous decisions if used sparingly.
• Practice statement in civil law 

  British Railway Board v Herrington – child hit by a train while trespassing across the track 
• Practice statement in criminal law

  R v R and G – ruling to do with recklessness 
• The court of appeal should follow its own previous decisions except when (Young):

  1.     There are two previous conflicting decisions

  2.     Where a previous decision conflicts with the house of lords decision (HofL is followed)

  3.     The previous decision was made per incuriam 
• Per incuriam – a previous judgement failed to pay attention to relevant statute or precedent 
• The criminal division of the court of appeal can also refuse to follow a past decision if the law had been ‘misapplied or misunderstood’.
• High court 

  o   Decisions must be followed by lower courts but not by other High Court Judges

  These are generally highly persuasive so are normally followed.
• Lower courts 

  o   Don’t set binding precedent 

  o   Decisions of Crown Courts are persuasive and can bind magistrates