/
How to avoid following a precedent? How to avoid following a precedent?

How to avoid following a precedent? - PowerPoint Presentation

debby-jeon
debby-jeon . @debby-jeon
Follow
447 views
Uploaded On 2016-06-11

How to avoid following a precedent? - PPT Presentation

What can a judge do when there is a previous case which sets a precedent Distinguish their current case open to all levels of court Overrule the decision in the previous case only open to judges in courts HIGHER than the original decision ID: 358007

previous court case decision court previous decision case follow appeal spratt supreme house statement practice brown cases parmenter lords savage sue facts

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "How to avoid following a precedent?" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

How to avoid following a precedent?Slide2

What can a judge do when there is a previous case which sets a precedent?

Distinguish their current case (open to all levels of court)

Overrule the decision in the previous case (only open to judges in courts HIGHER than the original decision)

For the Supreme Court only – use the practice statement 1966

For the Court of Appeal only considering its own previous cases – follow the decision in Young v Bristol AirplaneSlide3

Distinguishing

R v Brown House of Lords

R v Wilson Court of Appeal

The CA felt able to avoid following Brown and found Mr Wilson ‘not guilty’ because they said the facts were sufficiently different. The case of Brown remains the law for all cases with similar facts. Slide4

Overruling a previous decision

A v Hoare

Overruled

Stubbings

v Webb

…to allow women who had been sexually attacked / abused by men when they were younger to sue them after the usual ‘limitation’ period had expiredSlide5

Supreme court using the practice

statement

1966

‘when

it appears right to do so’

Addie v

Dumbreck 1929BRB v Herrington 1972The Later case allowed child trespassers injured while trespassing on a railway track to sue successfully. The House of Lords used the Practice Statement to overrule the previous decision because the times had changed and attitudes had changed towards child trespassers since 1929. Slide6

Court of Appeal

In Young v Bristol Aeroplane

3 options

If there are 2 conflicting previous decisions of the Court of Appeal – CHOOSE which one to follow (R v

Parmenter

CA chose to follow R v Spratt which was heard on the same day as R v Savage but had a different result – When R v Parmenter

went to the House of Lords they overruled Spratt instead!!!) If the Supreme Court has already made a decision that contradicts the CA case – FOLLOW the Supreme CourtIf the previous decision was made ‘per incuriam’ – they can change the decision to correct a mistake in the law made in the previous decision. Slide7

Example of CA choosing a previous case to follow….

PROBLEM: there was uncertainty as to whether a person needed to foresee harm to

s

omeone they injured in order to be guilty of s.47 actual bodily harm;

R v Spratt (CA) said YES R v Savage (CA) said NO

Both were Court of Appeal cases decided on the same day…

In R v Parmenter (CA) chose to follow Spratt at first but the House of Lords later confirmed that Savage was correct.