Topic: Doctrine of Precedents

Order Description
Summary:
“The value of the doctrine of precedent to the common law… is not simply that it ensures respect for past decisions but also that it ensures that bad decisions do not have to be repeated.”

N Duxbury, The Nature and Authority of Precedent (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008)

Drawing on examples from the cases that we have studied, consider to what extent the power to depart from previous decisions is an integral part of the doctrine of precedent.

Instruction:

Young v Bristol Aeroplane (special attention, key case)

Doctrine of Precedents key cases:

Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) AC 562
McLoughlin v O’Brian (1983) 1 AC 410

Flexibility v Certainty

Key cases
Young v Bristol Aeroplane
R v R (1991)
Hale’s principle
SW case
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights

*OSCOLA references
*Bibliography and footnotes
*Depth analysis (no descriptive writing,)
*750 words
*Other cases as support can be used it (English cases)
*Academic articles
* analytical depth when discussing cases assess fully the relevance of reversing, overruling and distinguishing
*1966 practice statement

Topic: Doctrine of Precedents

Order Description
Summary:
“The value of the doctrine of precedent to the common law… is not simply that it ensures respect for past decisions but also that it ensures that bad decisions do not have to be repeated.”

N Duxbury, The Nature and Authority of Precedent (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008)

Drawing on examples from the cases that we have studied, consider to what extent the power to depart from previous decisions is an integral part of the doctrine of precedent.

Instruction:

Young v Bristol Aeroplane (special attention, key case)

Doctrine of Precedents key cases:

Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) AC 562
McLoughlin v O’Brian (1983) 1 AC 410

Flexibility v Certainty

Key cases
Young v Bristol Aeroplane
R v R (1991)
Hale’s principle
SW case
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights

*OSCOLA references
*Bibliography and footnotes
*Depth analysis (no descriptive writing,)
*750 words
*Other cases as support can be used it (English cases)
*Academic articles
* analytical depth when discussing cases assess fully the relevance of reversing, overruling and distinguishing
*1966 practice statement