Understanding Judicial Precedent in Legal Systems
Posted by Mirwan bugti and classified in Law & Jurisprudence
Written on in 
English with a size of 2.13 KB
In simple words, judicial precedent refers to previously decided judgments of the superior courts, such as the High Courts and the Supreme Court, which judges are bound to follow. This binding character of the previously decided cases is important, considering the hierarchy of the courts established by the legal systems of a particular country. Judicial precedent is an important source of law, but it is neither as modern as legislation nor as old as custom. It is an important feature of the English legal system as well as of other common law countries that follow the English legal system.
In most developed legal systems, the judiciary is considered to be an important organ of the state. In modern societies, rights are generally conferred on the citizens by legislation, and the main function of the judiciary is to adjudicate upon these rights. The judges decide those matters based on the legislation and prevailing custom, but while doing so, they also play a creative role by interpreting the law. By this exercise, they lay down new principles and rules that are generally binding on lower courts within a legal system.
It is important to understand the extent to which the courts are guided by precedents. It is equally important to understand what really constitutes the judicial decision in a case and which part of the decision is actually binding on the lower courts.
Judicial decisions can be divided into the following two parts:
Ratio Decidendi (Reason for Decision):
'Ratio decidendi' refers to the binding part of a judgment. 'Ratio decidendi' literally means reasons for the decision. It is considered the general principle deduced by the courts from the facts of a particular case. It becomes generally binding on the lower courts in future cases involving similar questions of law.
Obiter Dicta (Said by the Way):
An 'obiter dictum' refers to parts of judicial decisions that are general observations of the judge and do not have any binding authority. However, obiter of a higher judiciary is given due consideration by lower courts and has persuasive value.