MORE JUDICIAL PRECEDENT Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Binding precedent

A

A precedent which must be followed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Case that goes with binding

A

Donoghue v Stevenson and grant v Austrialan knitting mills

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Donoghue v Stevenson

A

A women found a snail in her ginger beer and become very ill. She took the manufacturer to court and courts said the manufacturer is liable to the end consumer of that product. She won the case and created an original and binding precedent that the company owed a duty of care to the consumer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Grant v Australian knitting mills

A

Had to follow Donoghue.
He bought full body underwear and developed a severe skin disorder and was hospitalised for a year. Took them to court followed Donoghue as he was not given the duty of care he was initled too

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Original precedent

A

A precedent which involves a point of law that’s yet to be decided

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Case that goes with original

A

Re A

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Re A

A

Mary and Jodie conjoined twins, doctors said they’ll only live until they are 9 if not separated. If they are separated Mary will die and Jodie will live longer. Parents didn’t want them separated it went to court and was decided they have to be separated . Original precedent was made that it was in the best interests for the child

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Persuasive precedent

A

Precedent in which a judge can look at the legal principles and if persuaded by the legal reasoning they can follow

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Case that goes with persuasive

A

R v Gotts followed r v Howe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

R v Howe

A

Murder case, the obiter was ‘the defence of duress should not be available for those who attempt murder’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

R v gotts

A

Persuaded by r v Howe’s obiter statement and followed it. 16 year old ordered by his dad to kill his mam otherwise he would shoot him. He pleaded guilty and appealed the judges rules, appeal was dismissed and conviction upheld

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What can make a precedent persuasive

A

Obiter dicta statements
Decisions from privy council
Courts lower in hierarchy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Following

A

To apply the same legal principle from an earlier case to a present case because the material facts are similar and the legal principle in the earlier case is from a court higher up in the hierarchy, so they are bound. Or it was an earlier decision of the same court

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Overruling

A

When a lager court determines that the law in a earlier and different case was wrongly decided. This may occur if a higher court decides that a decision made in an earlier and inferior court is wrong

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Reversing

A

A court higher up in the hierarchy overturns the decision of a lower court in the same case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Distinguishing

A

Allows a judge to avoid an otherwise binding precedent. It works where the material facts are different enough from a previous case so as to allow a judge to draw a distinction of the facts. When this is done they don’t have to follow the binding prevent and they are said to have distinguished from the case and set a fresh precedent

17
Q

Case to go with following

A

Donoghue v Stevenson and grant v Australian knitting mills

18
Q

Case to go with reversing

A

Sweet v parsley

19
Q

Cases to go with distinguishing

A

Merritt v Merritt distinguished Balfour v Balfour

20
Q

Overulling case

A

R v r

21
Q

Sweet v parsley

A

Upheld the decisions of the trial court and the divisional court that the appellant was guilty of being concerned in the management of premises used for the purpose of smoking cannabis contrary to the dangerous drugs act

22
Q

R v r

A

The House of Lords overruled the commonly held rule that a man could be guilty of raping his wife. R v r decided they can be guilty

23
Q

Balfour v Balfour and Merritt v Merritt

A

Merritt distinguished Balfour. The court of appeal distinguished the the case of Balfour on the grounds that the parties were separated

24
Q

When was the practice statement made

A

1966

25
Q

Practice statement cases

A

Pepper v hart overruling Davis v Johnson
Herrington v brb overruling Addie v dumbreck
R v shivpuri overruling Anderton v Ryan