English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-14 11:05:40 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

7 answers

It means that a court has decided a case based upon a certain set of facts under the law. For consistency sake, that court, or other courts confronted with the same or similar facts in later cases should decide them the same way. The earlier decision is termed the "precedent" for the latter.

If the earlier deciding court was one that had appellate jurisdiction over the later deciding court, then the precedent is said to be a "binding" precedent -- which the lower court must follow. Otherwise if the earlier court is of equal or parallel (ie, such as in another state) jurisdiction the earlier decision may be referred to as "persuasive" precedent, which the later court may sometimes refuse to follow.

2007-03-14 11:14:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

It means a reported case which has established certain principles which are to be followed by inferior courts where the circumstances are similar. The higher the court, the more imperative it is that lower courts follow its decisions, the House of Lords decisions being binding on all lower courts. The term "judicial precedent" can also be extended to cover the body of decisions in an area of the law, representing the accumulation of many years of legal process.

2007-03-15 04:09:52 · answer #2 · answered by Doethineb 7 · 0 0

Judicial precendent refers to prior court case(s). Those prior cases establish the rule for a particular legal issue. Each new court case builds on the previous court case involving the same or similar issue. This is often referred to as "stare decisis." It basically means that each court must abide by that which has already been decided by previous courts. So in a sense judicial precedent is really the law according to the previous judge.

2007-03-14 18:18:08 · answer #3 · answered by Dustin D 2 · 2 0

It means basically that when a judgement has been made in the higher courts, it is binding and that's what other judges measure the sentance they give by.

Most judges do not like to deviate from this precedent, because it's wide open to appeal. However thank God, there are some that do.........eg Hindley and Bradey....Never see the light of day again!

2007-03-18 17:54:20 · answer #4 · answered by ? 2 · 0 0

In UK this is called case law and is based on former rulings by the higher courts and law lords which are then applied to similar cases that follow .

2007-03-15 01:45:13 · answer #5 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 0 0

It refers to the concept that in the British and US legal systems (and their siblings), the holdings of higher courts are binding law, and that lower courts must follow those holdings as law.

2007-03-14 18:09:45 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1 0

Basically the first ruling establishes how the law will react in future similar cases.

2007-03-14 18:16:08 · answer #7 · answered by jay k 6 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers