A. Overview
- Only those statements in an earlier decision that constitute the ratio decidendi of that case are held to be binding. Everything else may be disregarded: these are called dicta or (if they are particularly useless) obiter dicta.
- As you may have guessed, what makes up the ratio decidendi of a case is pretty controversial.
- Not every analysis or rule a court applies in determining a holding counts as ratio decidendi.
- Some say that the ratio decidendi consists of the parts of the opinion that explain the rules of law applied by the court, that were also required to determine the issues.
- Others say that it is found by analyzing the facts of the precedent case and the judge's decision based on these facts. This is mostly an argument against the above, saying that a judge may not apply a rule at all, or formulate a rule that is too broad or narrow. It also mentions that coequal judges' opinions may have no influence over each other.
- Future judges are free to emphasize different aspects of a precedent case in order to promote a more consistent law.
- Still others claim that is it silly to think that each decided case has its own ratio decidendi. Only comparisons of many cases on a problem can provide any real guidance. (Ethnology versus Ethnography)
- The editors suppose that after a great deal of arguing and time, it will then be possible to tease out the rule or principle and then apply it consistently for a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment