Stare decisis is a Latin term that means 'standing by what has already been decided.' Stare decisis is a legal term that refers to the precedent doctrine. The doctrine of stare decisis became more established in the mid-nineteenth century when courts started keeping records of court trials and proceedings, making it easier for judges to make references to previous decisions (Kozel, 2010). The precedent doctrine obliges the courts to follow the rulings of the previous cases when ruling similar cases. Stare decisis ensures that judges approach court cases with similar facts and scenarios in the same way, meaning that it binds the court judges to follow the legal precedents that the courts set while ruling previous cases (Kozel, 2010). This paper will assess stare decisis by providing background information on this judicial decision rule, explaining its purpose, and evaluating its advantages and disadvantages.
Stare decisis is a common method followed by judges when making decisions in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. In these two countries, it is customary for the judges to follow precedent rulings when making court decisions. Once a higher court makes a ruling on a case, the other lower courts in the same jurisdiction are obligated to make decisions that are similar to the case ruling for similar subsequent cases, unless another higher court makes a different ruling on a similar case (Legal Information Institute, 2021). For example, suppose the Supreme Court in California makes a ruling on a certain case. In that case, all the other California courts are obligated to follow the Supreme Court's ruling when making rulings on similar cases. However, the courts in New York are not bound by the ruling made in California, but they can use it as a reference when making decisions on similar cases.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Courts and judges follow the stare decisis judicial decision rule to ensure uniformity and continuity of justice in court decisions. It helps the attorneys and judges to be consistent in applying the law. The doctrine also helps prevent the single judges in the lower courts from making decisions that contradict the upper courts' decisions (Kozel, 2010). Further, the use of the doctrine makes it easier for the judicial system to be more efficient as it precludes the need for judges to examine similar legal issues every time they arise in the courts. For example, In the USA, the Supreme Court made the landmark ruling in 1973 on the case of Roe v. Wade , which held that women had the right to decide whether to have an abortion or not (Legal Information Institute, 2021). This case still guides judges in making decisions on abortion cases even today.
The advantage of the judicial precedent doctrine is that it helps the judges make court decisions more easily since most of the cases have been decided previously. It also helps in preventing inconsistency in the application of the law. The doctrine also provides certainty and predictability on how the judges are likely to decide a case (Kozel, 2010). However, the critics of the doctrine opine that the doctrine promotes transfers of errors in subsequent cases. For example, if the high court makes an error in deciding a case, then the decisions with errors will be used in making judgments in subsequent cases leading to erroneous judgments (Legal Information Institute, 2021). Further, the concept of stare decisis limits the powers and independent application of the law by the lower courts as they are forced to follow the higher courts' decisions.
In conclusion, the concept of stare decisis refers to the judicial decision rule that obliges the lower courts to follow the precedent rulings of the higher courts in making rulings on similar cases. The purpose of the concept is to ensure consistency, uniformity, and continuity in applying the law while improving the courts' efficiency. The doctrine makes it easier for the judges to make decisions, although it limits the lower courts' independence and promotes transfer errors.
References
Kozel, R. J. (2010). Stare decisis as judicial doctrine. Wash. & Lee L. Rev. , 67 , 411.
Legal Information Institute (2021). Stare decisis . PDF file. Wex Legal Dictionary.
