Why might precedent cause problems for the development of Law?
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Wed Aug 13 2003
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
Why might precedent cause problems for the development of Law? Understanding the term 'precedent', and how it's narrow and broad sense affects the British Court system, it is easy to consider how it might also constrict and disregard the need for progression and modernisation. Some might argue in favour of old-fashioned methods, some may not. Let us first look at rigidity. In 1966, the House of Lords recognised the need to 'deviate' from the inflexible origins of Stare decisis, and the Lord Chancellor issued a practice statement to allow freedom of this principle "...where appropriate..." This is all well and good, should a litigant secure rights for appeal, if not, his/her case will be bound by set precedent and applied by the Court in question. A good example of this is Priestly v Fowler 1837, this principle stated that if an employee was injured by a fellow employee whilst carrying out...

