Question 1 a. A judge must hap either decision made by a higher(prenominal) beg in a case with similar stuff and nonsense facts. These decisions ar made dustatically according to the doctrine of binding precedence. This doctrine of binding precedence of stare decisis in Latin, is a schema where previous decisions if superior court bind another(prenominal) courts in subsequent similar cases. For example, if the Federal tourist court (Superior prickteaser in Malaysia) decided that a minor is not susceptible under contract. If a minor is sued in the High frivol for not fulfilling his obligation in a contract, the High cost testament follow this previous decision of the Federal Court. When a Judge hands down a decision, he overly has to fracture the reasons for his decision. This means we get the point of law (the bit we have to follow) as well as the facts and other things. If (in the appeallate courts) a judge disagrees with the majority decision, then they will also pretend up to write a report which explains why they disagree. Although this nonage fantasy doesnt have any binding power, it office be very persuasive in the future case. The advantages of: * in that respect is conclusion in the law.
By looking at alert precedents it is viable to forecast what a decision will be and see accordingly. * thither is uniformity in the law. Similar cases will be treated in the same way. This is important to give the system a sense of justice and to make the system satisfactory to the public. * Judicial precedent is flexible. There are a repress of ways to avoid precedents and this enables the system to change and to fit to sensit ive situations. * Judicial precedent is pra! ctical in nature. It is base on real facts, unlike legislation. * Judicial precedent is detailed. There is a wealth of cases to which to refer.If you want to get a fully essay, aim it on our website: OrderEssay.net
If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.