Evaluation of Judicial Precedent

Question 1

ADVANTAGE NO.1:

Certainty

Answer 1

One advantage is that it creates certainty in law. Because precedents are legally binding and are applied in the same way, this ensures the law is predictable.

In 90% of civil cases, the parties settle out of court. In 80% of criminal cases, defendants plead guilty at the first opportunity showing they know the potential outcome and want to get it without the expense of court.

Question 2

ADVANTAGE NO.2:

Fair and Consistent

Answer 2

Another advantage is that it is fair and consistent. Because precedents are difficult to overturn, they often last 100s of years and will be applied in the same way in all future cases.

For example, the definition of insanity under the M’Naughten Rules are deeply unpopular but the rules are applied consistently and fairly to all cases involving this defence.

Question 3

ADVANTAGE NO.3:

Detailed Law

Answer 3

Also, precedents create detailed law. Acts of Parliament are written in broad, general language and apply to a variety of situations whereas precedents focus on a single, specific issue providing detail to statutes.

For example, the case of Caparo v Dickman adapted the precedent on a Duty of Care in Donoghue v Stevenson to set out 3 specific rules for proving a Duty of Care. This specified the law and mad it much clearer.

Question 4

ADVANTAGE NO.4:

Flexibility

Answer 4

One final advantage, is that they allow for flexibility in the law. Even though precedents are difficult to overturn, judges are allowed some flexibility to replace or reinterpret the law as new situations emerge.

For example, the Practice Statement allows the Supreme Court to change a precedent ‘when they feel it is right to do so’ and the Court of Appeal can overturn its own precedents in the 3 situations set out in Young v Bristol Aeroplanes.