LA2: Doctrine of Precedent

Question 1

What is the phrase that best describes precedent?

Answer 1

star decisis

Question 2

What does ‘stare decisis’ mean?

Answer 2

to stand by what has been said

Question 3

What are the two parts of precedent and which on is binding?

Answer 3

Ratio Decindendi and Obiter Dicta. The Ratio part is binding.

Question 4

When was the case R v R?

Answer 4

in 1991

Question 5

Where was the case R v R 1991 heard?

Answer 5

House of Lords

Question 6

Why is the case R v R 1991 HL important?

Answer 6

Set precedent making rape within marriage an offence (in the ratio decidendi)

Question 7

When was the case Donoghue v Stevenson?

Answer 7

1932

Question 8

What happened in the case Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 HL?

Answer 8

established a general duty of care in negligence.

Question 9

When was the case R v Howe?

Answer 9

1987?

Question 10

What did the R v Howe 1987 HL case do?

Answer 10

set precedent that defence by duress unavailable to a defendant charged with murder.

Question 11

When was the case Rondel v Worsley?

Answer 11

1967

Question 12

What happened in the case Rondel v Worsley 1967 HL?

Answer 12

• case concerning whether a barrister can be sued for negligent work within the court.
• ratio stated could only sue for work carried out outside of court
• obiter said that solicitors couldn’t be either ( obiter as case about barristers)

Question 13

Which case is an example of persuasive precedent whereby the decisions of lower courts persuade the higher courts?

Answer 13

R v R 1991 HL, The House of Lords agreed with the Court of Appeal ruling that a man can be guilty of raping his wife.

Question 14

Which case by the Privvy council acted as persuasive precedent for the Court of Appeal cases R v James 2005 and R v Karimi 2006?

Answer 14

Attorney General for Jersey v Holley 2005

Question 15

When was the case Attorney General for Jersey v holley?

Answer 15

2005

Question 16

When was the case R v James?

Answer 16

2005

Question 17

When was the case R v Karimi?

Answer 17

2006

Question 18

Which supreme court case did they not follow the ruling of in R v James and R v Karimi and instead followed the ruling of the Attorney General for Jersey v Holley 2005 case?

Answer 18

R v Smith 2001 SC

Question 19

Which case established precedent for the unavailability of duress as a defence for murder? (set precedent due to the Obiter Dicta of another case in 1987 HINT)

Answer 19

R v Gotts 1992 HL set precedent as they were persuaded by the Obiter dicta in R v Howe 1987

Question 20

Which act established the Supreme Court?

Answer 20

The Constitutional Reform Act 2005

Question 21

When was the Practice Statement made?

Answer 21

1966

Question 22

What does the Practice Statement 1966?

Answer 22

allows the supreme court to depart from its previous decisions if it sees the right to do so.

Question 23

Which case previously banned the Supreme court from overruling its previous decisions?

Answer 23

London Street Tramways v LCC 1898

Question 24

In which civil case was the Practice Statement used for the first time?

Answer 24

Conway V Rimmer 1968

Question 25

When was the case Conway v Rimmer?

Answer 25

1968

Question 26

Which case did Conway v Rimmer 1968 overrule and why?

Answer 26

Duncan v Cammell Laird 1942 on a technical point of law

Question 27

Which case overruled Addie V Dumbrek 1929?

Answer 27

Herrington v British Railway Board 1972

Question 28

Why did the House of Lords in Herrington v British Railway Board 1972 overrule Addie v Dumbrek 1929?

Answer 28

To change precedent on the duty of care owed to a child trespasser. Previously was the fault of the parents but after 1972 made if the responsibility of the railway board

Question 29

In which case was the use of the Practice statement refused?

Answer 29

Jones v Secretary of State for Social Service 1972

Question 30

When was the case Jones v Secretary of State for Social Service?

Answer 30

1972

Question 31

What happened the in case of Jones v Sectary of State for Social Service 1972?

Answer 31

wanted to change the interpretation of the National Insurance Act 1946 as didn't agree with the previous, despite 4 out of 7 judges agreeing for change, was kept the same.

Question 32

Which case was the first criminal case to use the Practice Statement?

Answer 32

R v Shivpuri 1986 HL

Question 33

When was the case R v Shivpuri?

Answer 33

1986

Question 34

Which case did R v Shivpuri 1986 overrule and why? (outline the facts of each case)

Answer 34

Anderton v Ryan 1985 - changed precedent making it an offence to attempt to commit an impossible crime. In Anderton V Ryan, Ms Anderton thought she had bought a stolen video recorder which wasn't, so she was not found guilty of attempted handling. But in R v Shivpuri, the defendant had attempted to traffic drug when in actual fact they were just harmless herbal remedies, he was found guilty of attempting to commit an impossible crime.

Question 35

In which case did Lord Denning not follow the precedent set out in Rookes v Barnard 1964 and why?

Answer 35

Broome v Cassell 1971 because didn't want to folow the guidelines in Rookes v Barnard about exemplary damages.

Question 36

When was the case Rookes v Barnard?

Answer 36

1964

Question 37

When was the case Broome v Cassell?

Answer 37

1971

Question 38

When was the case Re Havana Railways HL?

Answer 38

1961

Question 39

What precedent did the Re Havana Railways 1961 HL case set?

Answer 39

that damages can only be awarded in English pounds

Question 40

Which Court of Appeal case did not follow the precedent set in Re Havana Railways 1961 HL?

Answer 40

Schorsch Meier v Henning 1976

Question 41

What happened in the case Schorsch Meier v Henning 1976?

Answer 41

Lord Denning did not follow the precedent set in Re Havana Railways 1961 and said damages should be awarded in any currency to remain in keeping with the changes in society.

Question 42

Was the case Schorsch Meier v Henning 1976 appealed to the House of Lords?

Answer 42

No

Question 43

When was the case Miliangos v George Frank Ltd?

Answer 43

1976

Question 44

What happened in the case Miliangos v George Frank ltd 1976?

Answer 44

- A trial judge followed the ruling in the Re Havana Railways case - Case appealed to Court of Appeal where Lord Denning overturned that decision and followed the decision in Schorsch Meier V Henning - Case then appeal to the House of Lords where the House of Lords followed the decision in Schorsch Meier, setting new precedent - House of Lords reprimanded Lord Denning for trying to undermine the HofL.

Question 45

Why is the case Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd 1944 important?

Answer 45

because it sets out the three important circumstances where the Court of Appeal isn't bound by itself

Question 46

What are the three important circumstances set out in Young v Bristol Aeroplance Co Ltd 1944 that prevents the Court of appeal binding itself?

Answer 46

- if there is a conflict between SC decision and CofA decision, SC decision must be followed - two conflicting CofA decisions, can choose which to follow - earlier decisions made 'per incuriam' do not have to be followed