precedent take 2

• what is precedent?

  Precedent is a source of law where decisions of judges create law for future judges to follow. Also known as case law.
• What is the general effect of precedent?

  the use of precedent can mean that a decision in a previous case can be binding on another court if the facts are similar
• what is the english system of precedent loosely based on?

  The latin maxin stare decisis
• What does the latin maxim stare decisis loosely translate to?

  Stand by what has been decided and do not unsettle the established.
• what are the two elements of precedent?

  Court hierarchy

  Ratio decidendi
• in terms of the elements of precedent, what is meant bya court hierarchy?

  Where Lower courts usually bound by higher ones
• what is meant by ratio decidendi in terms of the elements of precedent?

  this is the rule of law in a case, so we know what to apply to other cases
• what is the general rule in terms of the court hierarchy?

  The general rule is that a court must follow the decision of another court that is higher, or sometimes of equal status, in the hierarchy, but it does not have to follow the decision of a court that is below it.
• which courts does the supreme court bind?

  It binds all courts below itself
• What was the effect of the practice statement?

  It made it so that the supreme court was no longer bound by its own decisions.
• When was the practice statement introduced?

  1966
• Who made the practice statement?

  The lord chancellor in 1966
• what did the house of lords say in 1966 about the rigidity of precedent?

  They said that sticking to precedent too rigidly can lead to injustices, and restrict development of the law. Additionally, precedent is to be followed until it was deemed the right thing to do in departing from precedent
• when will the SC depart from it's own decisions?

  It needs to be convinced that there will be great hardship if they do not do so.
• what does the SC need to consider when departing from its own decisions?

  It must consider the effect of overrulling on established decisions. The SC wont overrule a decision just because they think its wrong.
• What is the significance of the cases of Hall v Simmons 2000 and BRB v Herrington?

  Both cases illustrate the usage of the practice statement.
• what are the facts of the case of hall v simmons 2000?

  In Hall v Simmons (2000), the House of Lords reconsidered the immunity that barristers and solicitors previously had from being sued for negligence in advocacy work, a protection established in Rondel v Worsley (1969). The Lords ruled that this immunity was no longer necessary, asserting that lawyers could owe a duty of care to their clients, even in their role as advocates, and could be held accountable for negligent representation. This decision marked a significant change in legal accountability for lawyers.
• when is the practice statement used in criminal law?

  The Practice Statement will be used in criminal law where there has been an error made and that needs to be corrected by overruling it.
• What is an example of the practice statement being used in criminal law?

  The case of R v R to overrule the decision made in the case of r v Caldwell. Thus, recklessness was chosen to be decided subjectively rather than objectively
• what courts does the court of appeal bind?

  The divisions do not bind eachother; within divisions, previuous decisions are normally binding on later ones- especially so in the civil division.
• who binds the civil court of appeal?

  The supreme court
• Which courts does the civil court of appeal bind?

  All courts below the civil court of appeal
• is the civil court of appeal bound by its decisions?

  Yes, until an exception applies
• Which case gives the exceptions on where the civil court of appeal os allowed to depart from their own decisions?


  Young bristol aeroplane co ltd 1944
• What are the three exceptions created in the young v bristol aeroplane co ltd 1944 case?

  Subsequent sepreme court decision prevails

  Two conflicting CA decisions, the court must follow one

  The decision was made per incuriam
• What does it mean if a decision was made per incuriam?

  Carelessly made or by mistake
• what case gives an example of a case being per incuriam?

  Williams v Fawcett
• what are the facts of the case williams v fawcett ?

  The claimant was imprisoned for breaching a non-molestation court order.

  The imprisonment was challenged bc the necessary paperwork failed to specify the breaches or grant an adjournment.

  The CA found the imprisonment invalid bc the notice wasnt signed by the court's 'proper officer'- a procedural requirement not explicity stated in rules.

  Previous decisions by the CA were deemed per Incuriam bc County court rules werent understood, but the CA refused to allow such decisions after seeing their errors.
• who binds the criminal CA?

  Supreme court
• Which courts does the criminal CA bind?

  All lower courts
• when is the criminal CA not bound by its own decisions?

  If the law is misunderstood or misapplied, or if the reputation and/or liberty of the appellant is at stake.
• which cases illustrate how the criminal CA isnt bound by its own decisions?

  R v Taylor and r v Gould
• which courts bind the high court?

  Court of appeal and Supreme court
• are high court judges bound by previous decisions?

  A high Court judge is not absolutely bound by the previous decision of another High Court judge although, in practice, they tend to follow them. Their decisions are highly persuasive on lower courts.
• who binds the crown, county and magistrate courts?

  Court of appeal (criminal and civil), supreme court
• what are the facts of donoghue v stevenson 1932?

  the C consumsed ginger beer purchased by a friend, it contained a decomposed snail. This caused the C to suffer from shock and gastroenteritis. The C sued the manufacturer, mr stevenson, despite there being no direct contract between them arguing that she was owed a duty of care
• what was the decision of donoghue v stevenson?

  The House of Lords ruled in favor of Donoghue, establishing that manufacturers owe a duty of care to the ultimate consumers of their products.
• What was the ratio decidendi of donoghue v stevenson?

  This case established the "neighbor principle," stating that individuals must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that could foreseeably harm their "neighbors"—those directly affected by their actions.
• what are the facts of mcloughlin v o'brian 1982?

  Mrs. McLoughlin’s husband and children were involved in a serious car accident. She saw her family in distress and injured at the hospital, leading to psychiatric harm. She sued for nervous shock despite not being present at the scene of the accident.
• what was the decision of mcloughlin v o'brian 1982?

  The House of Lords ruled in Mcloughlin's favor, extending liability for psychiatric harm to those who suffer as a result of witnessing the aftermath of an accident.