What are the disadvantages of the doctrine of precedent?

What are the disadvantages of the doctrine of precedent?

The doctrine of precedent presents several disadvantages. These are: (i) Rigidity: There is inherent rigidity in the application of the doctrine which may sometimes cause hardship to litigants. (ii) Bulk and complexity: The vast number of reported cases makes it difficult to learn and apply the law.

What are the advantages of following the doctrine of precedent?

The main advantage of using precedent is that it provides certainty in the law. As cases with sufficiently similar material facts are bound by past decisions, it provides an idea of how the case will be decided. Another advantage is that it provides consistent decisions within the law, which also ensures fairness.

What are the disadvantages of stare decisis?

Some of the disadvantages of stare decisis include:

• Rigidity: Sometimes, stare decisis brings flexibility to the table.
• Undemocratic decision-making: Unlike laws passed by governments, high-court decisions are often made by judges who are appointed (rather than elected).

What are the disadvantages of judges?

Judges

Judges
Advantages Case hardened – as full-time As they have legal knowledge – they can get through cases much quicker	Disadvantages Expensive – paid Chosen from an educated part of society – Barristers and Solicitors – therefore not representative of the public

What are the advantages and disadvantages of the common law system of stare decisis?

The advantage of the doctrine of precedent is that it provides certainty and predictability. The disadvantage, however, is that stare decisis can result in a lack of flexibility and an inability of the common law to adapt to changing moral, socio- economic, and political realities resulting in a static body of law.

Why is judicial precedent bad?

If courts can avoid follow precedent, or depart from their decisions, then court cases could be unpredictable. Also, different Supreme Court judges and Court of Appeal judges could depart from decisions and cause problems.

Is doctrine of precedent too rigid?

The doctrine of precedent is a vital part of English legal system as it provides a certainty to the law and sets up the hierarchy structure of the court system. Although it still is said to be rigid and inflexible, attempts of adaptation of social changes are made and it opens to the time and changes.

What is the difference between precedent binding precedent and stare decisis?

In Civil law and pluralist systems precedent is not binding but case law is taken into account by the courts. Binding precedent relies on the legal principle of stare decisis. Stare decisis means to stand by things decided. It ensures certainty and consistency in the application of law.

What are the dangers of a strict adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis?

Critics of stare decisis contend that strict adherence to the principle: (1) compounds injustice caused by wrongly decided cases; (2) fails to accommodate social and political developments that render the earlier decision outdated or ineffective; (3) perpetuates bad law until legislative action; and (4) amplifies …