The experience and wisdom of the predecessors has always acted as a guiding light in every field and when it comes to the noble legal system of England, the moorings of the predecessors cannot be ignored. However, the opponents of this principle are also correct in arguing that mechanical adherence to past judicial decisions without paying heed to the current socio-economic and political situation is regressive. Therefore, the debate has always remained inconclusive and the doctrine that lies at the heart of this ideological battle is the "Doctrine of Judicial Precedent". It is also known as the "Doctrine of Stare Decisis" and has long been used as an invaluable technique of making judicial decisions1.
The role played by the doctrine of judicial precedent in the English legal system is therefore immense which will be discussed in detail in the subsequent sections of this essay. The doctrine has evolved over hundreds of years but its importance in the English legal system has not diminished. This is the reason why along with a discussion on the doctrine, its relevance in the present times will also be analyzed in this essay. Scholars have always been of the opinion that the doctrine of judicial precedent is not an illusion and has a very important place in the English legal system.
The role of the doctrine of judicial precedent in the English legal system can be better understood by discussing the Doctrine itself. This age-old doctrine is based on the meaning derived from a Latin term, "Stare Decisis" which means "to stand by the previous decision"2. According to this doctrine, the lower courts or the courts at equal position in the judicial hierarchy are mandated to follow the previous decisions made by the courts and therefore the previous decisions act as the precedents. Under this Doctrine, precedents are formed on the basis of "Ratio Dicidendi" or "Obiter Dicta". The term "Ratio Dicidendi" refers to the reason for making the decision and the other term "Obiter Dicta" involves decisions or judgements for which the primary reason has not been explicitly mentioned3. These two rules play a very important role in the formation of precedents.
This is because the decisions that have a Ratio Dicidendi are the decisions for which reason in the form of a general statement is available to guide the future decisions of the courts, then such decisions form a precedent. The decision made during Donoghue vs Stevenson4 is a case in point. On the other hand, the decisions that belong to the Obiter Dicta category do not have any primary reason behind them and therefore they generally do not form a precedent, which means these decisions are not binding or mandatory for the courts to follow while making future decisions. However, decisions that belong to the Obiter Dicta category can be used by the court for assisting a particular decision or view of the court on a case.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co Ltd5 is a case in which the judge made use of Obiter Dicta to assist or justify the decision of the court of law. The doctrine of judicial precedent is believed to have brought stability and uniformity in the judicial decisions in centuries. The doctrine has the capacity to meet the demands of the growing and changing civilization and therefore it also provides important tools for dealing with the modern-day problems. Many scholars have highlighted the danger of depriving quality and responsive judicial decisions by relying excessively on the doctrine of judicial precedent and ignoring the interest and problems of the present day.
Yet, the courts of law have upheld the validity and significance of the doctrine by stating that the supremacy of the lock can be assured through this doctrine which is wise and socially acceptable. However, it has also been noted that the judges do have the power and capacity to revisit the previous decisions and interpret them in the light of the present conditions6. There is no dearth of cases or instances when the trial decisions have been overruled or not adhered to by the judges as the courts have reaffirmed to the fact that the Doctrine is not without exceptions. It has been made clear in various case laws by the judiciary that adhering to the doctrine of judicial precedent has to be the norm and if the court departs from this doctrine, then a valid and clear justification needs to be provided.
In the English legal system, the importance of the doctrine of judicial precedent cannot be emphasized enough. It is basically because the political system of the United Kingdom is not based on a single set of codified laws. Because of this the judiciary depends upon statues of the parliament and preceding decisions in order to take future decisions and interpret the statutes. In many cases it has been observed that the judiciary has overruled the previous decisions and therefore did not follow the doctrine. But such cases have been very limited and in most of the cases the focus of the judiciary for the court of law is on using the previous judgments and decisions as the guiding light of the future decisions.
Both proponents and opponents of the doctrine of judicial precedent are found in the legal system of England. But most of the judges have been supportive of this doctrine by stating that existence of a precedence on a matter of law helps the court in contemplation and application of the decision in the contemporary situations. This makes reflection and interpretation of the statutes more robust and effective as it acts as a validation measure through which the reliability and justiciability of the decision can be ascertained. It has been observed that only the legal provisions alone are sufficient and determine the legality and efficiency of the decisions.
If the decisions are placed alongside previous decisions and a justification of the decisions can be formed in the precedents then it becomes very easy for the courts to justify the reliability of the decisions. Apart from this reasoning of the decisions is one of the important parts of the legal proceedings and if a precedent exists on the situation or case under consideration then a normative basis can be provided to the decision. In the English legal system, a judicial precedent can work as both autonomous or non-autonomous arguments7. It has been observed that in cases where the common law is applicable the autonomous role of the judicial precedent can be easily asserted but on the other hand in cases of codified law it is difficult to ascertain the autonomous validation role that is being played by the previous decisions or judgements.
However, together codified laws, common laws and previous judgements form a strong foundation or background for the interpretation of various laws and judgements and also provide a normative basis for decision-making by the courts8. Therefore, the important role of the doctrine of judicial precedent in the English legal system has been emphasized by many stakeholders by mentioning its advantages and merits. But it has also been observed that in the cases when several previous decisions or judgements are referred to by the court the resulting decision becomes more generalized and does not specifically answer the case-related arguments. This level of generalization is not acceptable in the judicial system however if only a single prior decision is being taken into consideration, then it can be highly useful to indicate relevant links with the current cases. Hence, the validation process, justification of the decisions and efficiency of the decision making in the court of law and other aspects of the English legal system have been positively influenced by the doctrine of judicial precedent. Therefore, the importance of this doctrine has not declined in the present times as well.
As mentioned by various scholars, the doctrine of judicial precedent has still not lost its relevance and continues to hold immense significance in the English legal system. It has been observed that because of the parliamentary sovereignty in England, statutes often form the primary source from which laws are being derived and interpreted by the courts. Therefore, in this respect the importance of precedent can be considered to be less as compared to a statute9. However, this is not the case. Under the English legal system, the decisions made by the judges form a cornerstone of the system and since the English law is not codified like other written constitutions therefore the importance of precedents cannot be outweighed. In the present circumstances the society and the economy of the country is evolving at a rapid pace.
Modernity and globalization have resulted in many new challenges and opportunities which have not left the legal system untouched. Therefore, in such scenarios, it is often argued that the courts need to depart from the doctrine of judicial precedent and look at the cases and decisions from a new perspective10. But as history suggests, people learn from the past experience and the moorings and wisdom of the preceding judges cannot be ignored. Basically, it is the imperative of the judges to apply the judicial precedents by adapting to the present conditions and modifying the decisions to make them suitable for the future situations as well. It has also been argued that case laws are often very complex and difficult to understand for the common public.
Therefore, the formation of precedents often relies only on the wisdom and rationality of the judges. Implementation of the judicial precedents in the modern times has not witnessed any significant decline and is still considered as a model for making future decisions. The changes in the social and political environment of the modern times have however guided the use of doctrine of judicial precedent11. It has been observed that the judicial practices, statutory law system and the precedents together determine the use of the doctrine in the English legal system. Overall, irrespective of the numerous factors that have shaped the use of the doctrine of judicial precedent, the main responsibility lies in the convection of the bench making the decisions. Therefore, even in the scenario the importance of doctrine of judicial precedent is immense in the English legal system.
Thus, the importance of the doctrine of judicial precedent in the English legal system is immense. This Doctrine is bound in the hierarchy of courts and has proved to be effective in guiding the decisions and judgements of the judiciary at all levels. In various cases the courts have reaffirmed the importance of judicial precedent. However, at the same time it has also been observed by various judges that the court of law has the power and capacity to overrule the previous judgements and decisions if they do not hold true or suitable in the present circumstances.
The Doctrine has been applicable for centuries as an essential principle on which the judicial decisions are being based. As a result, if the judges or court depart from this doctrine then they are required to present a valid and reasonable justification or argument in support of the departure. Even in the present scenario the importance of this Doctrine in the English legal system has not depleted and has rather increased. The Doctrine is keeping pace with the changing political and economic situations of the country and the ever-evolving society has always accepted this doctrine. Therefore, in the legal system of England, the role played by the doctrine of judicial precedent has and will continue to remain of vital importance.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] EWCA Civ 1
Donoghue vs Stevenson (1932) SC (HL) 31
Eisenberg, Melvin, The principles of legal reasoning in the common law. In Common Law Theory, ed. D.E. Edlin. (Cambridge University Press, 2007)
Philip Seaforth, James, Introduction to English Law: 5th ed, 1962, Butterworths, London, from p. 13
Wilson, Steve, The doctrine of judicial precedent in the English Legal System (Oxford University Press, 2020).
Kalis, Roman, Is the English Doctrine of Judicial Precedent Becoming only an illusion? (2008)
Loughran, John, “Some Reflections on the Role of Judicial Precedent”, 22 Fordham L. Rev. 1 (1953).
You Might Also Like:-
Business Law Principles Assignment Sample
Craft An Outstanding Assignment Paper from the Best Business Law Case Study in Canada
Get 24x7 instant assistance whenever you need.
Get affordable prices for your every assignment.
Assure you to deliver the assignment before the deadline
Get Plagiarism and AI content free Assignment
Get direct communication with experts immediately.
Get
500 Words Free
on your assignment today
It's Time To Find The Right Expert to Prepare Your Assignment!
Do not let assignment submission deadlines stress you out. Explore our professional assignment writing services with competitive rates today!
Secure Your Assignment!