One of the hallmarks of any good decision-making process is consistency: judicial precedent helps to ensure this - Essay Example

One of the Hallmarks of any Good Decision-Making Process is Consistency: Judicial Precedent Helps to ensure this.” Discuss Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Discussion 3 Conclusion 6 References 7 Introduction Conceptually, ‘judicial precedent’ is recognised as a procedure on the basis of which, judges follow the decisions that are made in prior cases with identical or similar facts. In the English law, judicial precedent doctrine is used effectively as an application with regard to stare decisis, which implies that the decision in the legal cases are to be made in accordance with identical decided cases. In this regard, in the current practice of the judicial system, it has often been identified that the inferior courts apply and make judgements based on the legal principles formulated as well as implemented by higher courts in previous instances. In this context, the courts practicing this principle are deemed to be able to ensure that legal decisions are made in a consistent along with predictable manner (Tufal, n.d.). Taking into account a similar notion, the essay emphasizes the importance of judicial precedent in developing a hallmark in the decision making process. Additionally, the different situations where the principle of precedent is not included in decision making have also been considered in this discussion. Discussion In the English law, judicial precedent doctrine plays an important role, with the assistance of which, effective future legal decisions are made on the basis of judgements delivered in the past identical or similar cases. The judges, while making decisions apply the law sources following their analysis. In this regard, the judges are recognised to make effective decisions on the basis of different legal principles. Contextually, the judges represented with similar decided cases of the past should follow the legal principle with the aim of making judgements consistently and in the fairest manner. Accordingly, based on the concept of ‘judicial precedent’, the decisions made by the judges are segregated into two dimensions, including ratio decidendi and obiter dictum. ‘Ratio decidendi’ implies the practice or law on the basis of which, the decision is made. Ratio decidendi depicts the facts that are outlined by the judges as a basis of evidence. In this context, the judges, on the basis of evidence, facts and identified laws, make their judgements. On the other hand, obiter dictum signifies that the judges are required to make adequate speculations to deliver appropriate judgements of cases having different facts along with legal issues (Kallis, n.d.). In the English legal system, the primary hallmark of law is to make effective decisions in a consistent manner with the application of relevant legal principles as well as precedent. In this regard, the doctrine of judicial precedent is identified as an important consideration of English law, especially in the field of equality, contract and tort law. Additionally, in the English law, the principle of judicial precedent is applied as a unique feature with the aim of maintaining consistency in their decisions and judgements. Moreover, the judges are recognised to apply the decisions of latter cases so that better flexibility as well as certainty is maintained in the decision making process. The judicial precedent in the English legal system is also deemed to possess appropriate quality of applicable law sources, being capable of associating future judges for appropriate positioning in the judicial system as well as hierarchy [Boys v Chaplin [1968] CA and Fitzsimons v Ford Motor Co [1946] CA] (Sixth Form Law, 2008). However, the decisions made on the basis of judicial precedent might not be applicable if judgements are overruled or distinguished. In this regard, the binding of the judicial precedent in the later cases shall rather facilitate the judges to maintain uniformity in the judgements made in different courts consisting House of Lords, Court of Appeal, High Court, Crown Court and County Courts along with Magistrate Courts. Subsequently, the doctrine of judicial precedents will also facilitate in ensuring that justice and judgements are made in a stable and consistent way adhering to the principle of continuity, which is commonly recognised as stare decisis (Mitchell & Dadhania, 2003; Vong, n.d.). Respectively, it can be comprehended that judicial precedent is an effective approach in the decision making procedure of the judicial system as it assists in making consistent and reliable judgements. Nevertheless, the doctrine of judicial precedent has been contradicted on different grounds in the present legal proceedings. It is accordingly identified that the principle of judicial precedent can increase complexity as the judges in their decision making procedure are required to go through a large number of decided cases, which comprises different law sources and additionally, the newly devised legal regulations. In this context, the judges might face complexity and time-consuming challenges in making appropriate decisions and identifying suitable law sources as well as legal principles to deliver fairest judgement. Additionally, judicial precedent is also recognised to raise rigidity as the judges may be prejudiced to make judgement on the basis of inappropriate decisions in the precedent cases. Moreover, judges might face the problem of illogical distinctions as the judges are required to undergo enormous number of cases with different precedents. In this respect, judges might make decisions in an unpredictable along with uncertain manner (Pearson Education Ltd, 2014; Watkin, 1989). Correspondingly, the Parliament of the UK is entrusted with the responsibility of formulating as well as implementing laws, also acting as an important law making body. The Parliament formulates statutes, which are the primary source of law for the English legal system. In this respect, a lack of retrospective effective with the practice of judicial precedent can be witnessed, as in the case of SW v United Kingdom (1995) (Pearson Education Ltd, 2014; Hudoc, 1995). Contextually, it can be ascertained that the judicial precedent doctrine may be criticized on certain grounds as it adversely affect the decision making process of the judges in the English legal system. Conclusion The above discussion apparently reveals that judicial precedent is an effective principle adopted in the English law with the objective of making legal decisions appropriately. Additionally, judicial precedent is also recognised as a doctrine assisting in making judicial decisions in a reliable as well as consistent manner. It is also determined as a hallmark in the English legal system of making successful decisions. It has been identified that there are certain limitations of judicial precedent, which includes increased complexities, rigidity, illogical distinction and lack of retrospective effects among others. These limitations are identified to adversely affect the decisions delivered by judges in the present scenario due to increased number of identical cases and rising complexities in relevant law application. Nevertheless, emphasising the competencies of the judges, judicial precedent can be argued as an important principle of making consistent decision in relation to common laws. References Hudoc, 1995. Case of S.W. v. the United Kingdom. Sites. [Online] Available at: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-57965#{"itemid":["001-57965"]} [Accessed January 28, 2014]. Kallis, R., No Date. Is the English Doctrine of Judicial Precedent Becoming only an Illusion? Files. [Online] Available at: http://www.law.muni.cz/sborniky/dp08/files/pdf/mezinaro/kalis.pdf [Accessed January 28, 2014]. Mitchell, A. R. & Dadhania, M., 2003. As Level Law. Psychology Press. Pearson Education Ltd, 2014. Sources of Law. Part 1. [Online] Available at: http://catalogue.pearsoned.co.uk/assets/hip/gb/hip_gb_pearsonhighered/samplechapter/1408267004.pdf [Accessed January 28, 2014]. Sixth Form Law, 2008. Cases - judicial precedent in the Court of Appeal. Cases. [Online] Available at: http://sixthformlaw.info/02_cases/mod2/cases_precedent_coa.htm [Accessed January 28, 2014]. Tufal, A., No Date. Judicial Precedent. Introduction. [Online] Available at: http://www.lawteacher.net/PDF/Judicial%20Precedent.pdf [Accessed January 28, 2014]. Vong, D., No Date. Binding Precedent and English Judicial Law-Making. Art. [Online] Available at: https://www.law.kuleuven.be/jura/art/21n3/vong.pdf [Accessed January 28, 2014]. Watkin, T. G., 1989. Legal Record & Historical Reality: Proceedings of the Eighth British Legal History Conference. Continuum. Read More