The English legal system is based on applications of the doctrine of precedent, in which the judicial decisions from the higher court are binding on the lower court. This following essay will illustrate different part of the doctrine of precedent and do judges bound by their previous decisions or not in different hierarchy of courts. Moreover, explaining the problems encountered with the doctrine of precedent and the methods available to avoid precedent in the English legal system.
The English law system is based on the operation of judicial precedents, judicial precedents are judgments or decisions of a court on cases recorded in law reports, which judges can refer back to the past judgments on cases that are sufficiently similar. The doctrine of judicial precedents involves an application of stare decisis, 'to stand by the decided'. In practice, this means lower courts are bound to follow judicial precedent set by higher courts, providing consistency and predictability in the system that follows previous cases because it means that all cases are decided in a similar manner. Nonetheless, within the judicial precedent, besides the binding part on lower courts which known as Ratio Decideni, there is also the persuasive part of the judgment which is Obiter Dictum, serving persuasively for later similar cases to consider. .
Using the case, Donoghue V Stevenson (1932), in which the victim suffered injury as a result of the decomposing snail from the bottle of ginger beer, to illustrate how judicial precedent operates. The House of Lords held that manufacturers have the duty to make sure their products are safe to consume. Later courts recognize products are not only food and drinks but also underpants, motor cars, hair dye, lifts and chemicals. 1Then in Grant V Australian Knitting Mills (1936). The claimant bought some underwear which caused dermatitis. The claim was successful, based on the precedent set by Donoghue v Stevenson.
