allows lawyers to advise clients on the likely outcome of a case. This can also promote alternative ways of resolving disputes (ADR) in civil cases.
Consistency and fairness
JP is seen as fair and just when like cases are treated the same. Parties to a dispute can see how a decision was made.
Precision
principles of law are set out and build up in decided cases (ratio decidendi and legal tests) so the law becomes very precise
Flexablility
being able to distinguish cases allows for flexibility as does the Practice Statement when the Supreme Court want to revoke bad decisions.
Time Saving
Predictable outcomes from precedent may lead parties to use ADR instead of the court to resolve disputes thereby saving time and money.
Law can evovled with changing social attitudes
R v R (1991), prior to this case, a husband could demand sex whether the wife wanted to participate or not which amounted to rape. Rape within marriage was now unacceptable in a changing society.
Details of JP can be added to statute
R v Clinton (2012) clarified the law on sexual infidelity as not being a qualifying trigger.
