LibAnswers

Andrew Taylor› Academic Services Librarian Faculty of Business, Law and Criminology

Legal precedent and stare decisis are core principles that form the foundation of English common law. Understanding how these concepts work is essential. Stare decisis is a Latin phrase meaning 'to stand by things decided'—a shortened version of the full phrase stare decisis et non quieta movere, which translates as 'to stand by things decided and not disturb settled points'. The doctrine means that courts follow the legal principles and decisions established in previous cases when deciding new disputes with similar facts.​ Once a court has decided how the law applies to a particular set of circumstances, that decision becomes a guide for future judges facing similar situations. This creates consistency, predictability, and fairness in the legal system, so the law is applied equally to all people.​

How Precedent is Applied

The doctrine operates through two types of stare decisis:

Vertical stare decisis. This occurs when lower courts must follow the decisions of higher courts. For example, the Court of Appeal must follow Supreme Court rulings. This creates a clear hierarchy of authority within the court system.​

Horizontal stare decisis. This occurs when a court follows its own previous decisions. Even higher courts generally stand by their own precedents unless there is special justification to depart from them.​

When a judge delivers a judgment, the decision contains two distinct parts:​

Ratio decidendi (meaning 'the reason for the decision'). This is the legal principle or rule that the judge applied to the facts of the case to reach their conclusion. This is the binding part of the judgment—the part that becomes precedent and must be followed in future similar cases. 

Obiter dicta (meaning 'things said in passing'). These are comments or observations made by the judge that are not strictly necessary to decide the case. These might include hypothetical scenarios or remarks about how the law would apply if the facts were different. Obiter dicta are not binding, but judges in later cases may find them persuasive and choose to follow them.​

Binding and Persuasive Precedent

Binding precedent is a decision that a court is obliged to follow. This occurs when:​

• A lower court is deciding a case with facts similar to a previous case from a higher court in the same system, or

• A court is following its own previous ruling

Persuasive precedent is a decision that a court may choose to follow, but isn't required to. Sources of persuasive precedent include:​

• Decisions from the Privy Council (the final appeal court for Commonwealth countries)

• The obiter dicta from earlier cases

• Decisions from lower courts or different jurisdictions

• Rulings from the European Court of Human Rights

Examples

Donoghue v Stevenson

In the famous case Donoghue v Stevenson, a woman named Mrs. Donoghue found a decomposed snail in a bottle of ginger beer purchased by a friend. She became ill and sued the manufacturer. The House of Lords found in her favour, which established an original precedent that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers, even if they've never met. This ratio decidendi became binding precedent that had to be followed in subsequent cases involving similar manufacturer-consumer relationships.​

Daniels v R White and Sons and Tarbard

In Daniels v R White and Sons and Tarbard, Mr Daniels bought a bottle of R Whites lemonade [Video: R Whites advert from the 1980s (The 100 Greatest TV Ads)] over the counter at Mrs Tarbard's pub. Mr Daniels experienced an immediate burning sensation and suffered injury after drinking the contents of the bottle, which contained half-a-teaspoon of carbolic acid as well as lemonade. The judge in this case was bound to follow the ratio decidendi of Donoghue v Stevenson, which established the 'neighbour principle' that the manufacturer owed a duty of care to the final consumer of the product, even without a direct contractual relationship. However, in this case, the claim against the manufacturer failed because the manufacturer was able to prove they had a 'fool-proof' cleaning and filling process.

Finding Precedent

You can use Westlaw UK to locate relevant cases and precedents for your assignments. Simply search for a case or law and Westlaw UK will show links to where cases were reported, as well as other cases citing them.​

If you are unsure how to access Westlaw UK, please see 'How do I access Westlaw?'

For guidance finding case law, see 'How do I find case law in Westlaw UK?'

When Precedent Can Be Overruled

Although courts generally follow precedent, it is not an absolute rule. In 1966, the House of Lords stated that precedent could be departed from 'when it appears right to do so', particularly if precedents are unworkable, badly reasoned, or appear to cause injustice. The Supreme Court can overrule its own previous decisions, particularly in constitutional cases where precedent has become outdated or harmful.​​

Murphy v Brentwood District Council is an example of precedent being overruled. The ruling in this case overruled the earlier House of Lords decision of Anns v Merton London Borough Council. In Anns, the House of Lords held that local authorities could be liable in negligence for economic loss suffered by tenants due to building defects. However, in Murphy, the House of Lords decided that no such duty of care existed, as the damage suffered by the claimant was purely economic. This fundamentally changed how negligence is applied to local authorities and limited the circumstances in which economic loss can be recovered for defective premises.

Please contact me if you need any support with finding precedents.

Related questions