Precedent and Doctrine of Precedent:
Precedent: Precedent is the legal judgement that has been made within a case when the dispute is heard in courts.
Doctrine of Precedent: The doctrine of precedent is overall framework that works on the notion that judges should apply the same outcome to later cases if there are similar material facts exist for consistency and fairness. The doctrine of precedent requires judges to examine the ratio decidendi (the reason for deciding), upholding the notion of stare decisis of standing by what has been decided. There are also methods in which judges can employ if they do not wish to following precedent through reversing, overruling, distinguishing and disapproving however these options tends to be more effective for superior courts.
Binding Precedent:
Binding precedent refers to precedent that must be followed. This is because the precedent was established by a higher court within the same court hierarchy as the current court in which is examining the precedent. The precedent is binding if similar material facts exists and the lower court cannot distinguish (find differences) that can differentiate the two cases and therefore must apply the precedent that is existing.
Persuasive Precedent:
Persuasive precedent refers to precedent that does not have to be followed however may have an influence on the decision being made. Persuasive precedent can be those that have been established from a lower court, a court that is outside the current hierarchy or by courts on the same level. As such, they do not have to be followed however judges may still choose to apply them for consistency and fairness.
Precedent: Precedent is the legal judgement that has been made within a case when the dispute is heard in courts.
Doctrine of Precedent: The doctrine of precedent is overall framework that works on the notion that judges should apply the same outcome to later cases if there are similar material facts exist for consistency and fairness. The doctrine of precedent requires judges to examine the ratio decidendi (the reason for deciding), upholding the notion of stare decisis of standing by what has been decided. There are also methods in which judges can employ if they do not wish to following precedent through reversing, overruling, distinguishing and disapproving however these options tends to be more effective for superior courts.
Binding Precedent:
Binding precedent refers to precedent that must be followed. This is because the precedent was established by a higher court within the same court hierarchy as the current court in which is examining the precedent. The precedent is binding if similar material facts exists and the lower court cannot distinguish (find differences) that can differentiate the two cases and therefore must apply the precedent that is existing.
Persuasive Precedent:
Persuasive precedent refers to precedent that does not have to be followed however may have an influence on the decision being made. Persuasive precedent can be those that have been established from a lower court, a court that is outside the current hierarchy or by courts on the same level. As such, they do not have to be followed however judges may still choose to apply them for consistency and fairness.
