Everything about Court Decision totally explained
Case law (also known as
decisional law) is that body of reported judicial
opinions in countries that have
common law legal systems. Published court opinions include
precedents, or rules governing future court decisions. Common-law upholds the fundamental English
legal system, which is the jurisdiction to make
laws. Additionally,
constitutional law continues the
case law of people's
human rights.
In the United States, law derived from judicial decisions is also referred to as
common law. This type of law operates by application of precedent and so is also known as
precedential law. Because case law isn't enacted by a legislature, it's also a type of
non-statutory law.
Description
Case law is judge-made
law that interprets prior case law,
statutes and other legal authority. Judges may also refer to persuasive authority such as the
Corpus Juris Secundum,
Halsbury's Laws of England or the doctrinal writings found in the
Recueil Dalloz and law commissions such as the
American Law Institute
In the
civil law tradition, case law formally plays a minor role compared to the status of the
civil code; however, judicial interpretation of the civil code, interpreting the legal meaning of the code's provisions, clarifying them, and providing for unforeseen developments, is often referred to as a
jurisprudence constante. In
France, the
jurisprudence constante of the
Cour de cassation (for civil and penal cases) or the
Conseil d'État (for administrative cases) is in practice equivalent to case law, and is considerably important in certain areas such as labor law and administrative law. In particular, the
Conseil d'État and the
Constitutional Council have adopted "fundamental principles" that
statutes and
regulations must follow, even when those principles were not explicitly written in statutes.
In the common law tradition, case law interprets laws, via
precedents, based on how prior
cases have been decided. Case law governs the impact court decisions have on future cases. Unlike most civil law systems, common law systems follow the doctrine of
stare decisis in which lower courts usually make decisions consistent with previous decisions of higher courts.
Generally speaking there's no direct oversight that appellate courts have over a
court of record. If a lower court judge acts against precedent and the case isn't
appealed, the lower court decision will stand. This may occur more frequently than has been documented as an appeal is usually quite expensive to prepare.
A court may rule against a precedent that's outdated — that is, the court believes that developments or trends in legal reasoning render the precedent inapplicable. In doing so, the court may wish to help the law evolve by ruling against precedent and thereby indirectly inducing a losing party to appeal. If the court successfully induces the appeal, the appellate court will have an opportunity to review the lower court's decision and may adopt the lower court's reasoning and overturn previous case law. This may happen several times as the case works its way through intermediate appellate systems.
Lord Denning, first of the
High Court of Justice, later of the
Court of Appeal, provided a famous example of this evolutionary process in his development of the concept of
estoppel starting in the world renowned
High Trees case:
Central London Property Trust Ltd v. High Trees House Ltd [1947] K.B. 130.
The different roles of case law in civil and common law traditions create differences in the way that courts render decisions. Common law courts generally explain in detail the rationale behind their decisions with numerous citations to previous decisions and other authority (called
ratio decidendi). By contrast, decisions in civil law jurisdictions are generally very short, referring only to
statutes. The reason for this difference is that these civil law jurisdictions adhere to a tradition that the reader should be able to deduce the logic from the decision. Courts in civil law jurisdictions also render their decisions so that, in some cases, it's somewhat difficult to apply previous decisions to the facts presented in future cases. Some
pluralist systems, such as
Scots law in
Scotland and so-called civil law jurisdictions in
Quebec and
Louisiana, don't follow these traditions as these systems have been heavily influenced by the Anglo-American common law tradition; however, their substantive law is firmly rooted in the civil law tradition. Because of their position between the two main systems of law, these types of legal systems are sometimes referred to as mixed systems of law.
Law professors in common law traditions play a much smaller role in developing case law than professors in civil law traditions. Because court decisions in civil law traditions are brief and not amenable to establishing precedent, much of the exposition of the law in civil law traditions is done by academics rather than by judges; this is called
doctrine and may be published in treatises or in journals such as
Recueil Dalloz in France. Historically, common law courts relied little on legal scholarship; thus, at the turn of the twentieth century, it was very rare to see an academic writer quoted in a legal decision (except perhaps for prominent jurists such as
Coke and
Blackstone). Today academic writers are often cited in legal decisions as persuasive authority; often, they're cited when judges are attempting to implement reasoning that other courts have not yet adopted, or when the judge believes the academic's restatement of the law is more compelling than can be found in precedent. Thus common law systems are adopting one of the approaches long common in civil law jurisdictions.
In federal or multi-jurisdictional law systems there may exist conflicts between the various lower appellate courts. Sometimes these differences may not be resolved and it may be necessary to distinguish how the law is applied in one
district, province, division or
appellate department. Usually only an appeal accepted by the
court of last resort will resolve such differences and, for many reasons, such appeals are often not granted.
Further Information
Get more info on 'Court Decision'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://case_law.totallyexplained.com">Case law Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |