Advs and Disadvs of Judicial Precedent

Question 1

Disadv 1

Answer 1

Compromises parliamentary sovereignty

Question 1

Advantage 1

Answer 1

Beneficial for parliamentary law-making time, as an issue with the law can be quickly resolved by a judge creating a new law to follow

Question 2

Disadv 2

Answer 2

There can be more than one opinion in the appeal courts and multiple reasons for a decision, making it hard to know which one to follow

Question 3

Adv 2

Answer 3

New/inexperienced judges can rely on the reasoning from the judgments of more senior judges, meaning they can fill in any gaps and are more likely correctly apply the law

Question 4

Disadv 3

Answer 4

Difficulty identifying ratio decidendi, especially in older cases, leading to confusion on which law to follow

Question 5

Disadv 4

Answer 5

Breaches Montesquieu’s seperation of powers, as the judiciary should follow law, not create it

Question 6

Adv 3

Answer 6

Precedent decisions provide detailed explanations of the law being created, ensuring consistency being created

Question 7

Adv 4

Answer 7

Fills in any gaps that may appear in the law, for example trespassing before the OLA 1984