Common Law in Australia Essay

867 Words 4 Pages
Common law is the law made by judges when deciding a certain case before the court. The reasoning the judge applies becomes a precedent, to be followed by other lower courts in future matters of similarity. This is the basis for the doctrine of precedent. A precedent is either a binding precedent, the reason for a decision of a higher court that must be followed by a court of lower status in the same hierarchy; or a persuasive precedent, meaning a reason for a decision of another court that is not binding, and should only be considered for its persuasive value. It is the role of the judge in the common law system to develop and expand the common law where he or she sees fit. It is paramount for judges to base their decisions on cases on …show more content…
In larger states, another court may fall between these two courts. All courts below the Supreme Court are bound to follow the decisions of the Supreme Court of that particular state. The doctrine of precedent provides for a degree of predictability and consistency that makes a judge’s ruling more straightforward, as like cases are treated alike.

While the duty of law-making is that of the Commonwealth and state parliaments, judges have no such authority. Judges can only create laws by means of case decisions. The reason for a particular decision in a case is known as the ratio decidendi, which in turn forms a binding precedent. Statements that are only taken into consideration as persuasive precedent are classed obiter dicta (statements by the way). Whilst the doctrine of precedent provides for certainty and consistency in legal decisioning, there are several disadvantages. The most prominent of these for a judge is that he may be forced to follow a ruling of a higher court based on binding precedent that may seem unjust in the circumstances. Rules may continue to be considered until a higher court has the opportunity to review them, however judges cannot take initiative on law reform. This makes it quite inflexible to change case law that has been in place for many years and is no longer relevant to the values of the current society. Judges do not often consider current values and are conservative in their attitudes toward law reform

Related Documents