Open Access Research Article
DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS
Published Paper
Article Details
DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS
AUTHORED BY - JOY M G
LL M 2nd Sem
Govt Law College, Ernakulam.
Introduction:
The doctrine of stare decisis is taken from the Latin maxim ‘stare decisis et non
quieta movere’ which means ‘to stand by decisions and not to disturb settled
matters’. In other words the decisions or adjudications pronounced by the Supreme
Court are binding on all courts within the territory of India. This is what
article 141 of the Constitution states – Law declared by the Supreme Court to
be binding on all courts within the territory of India.The expression “all
courts within the territory of India “means Courts other than the Supreme
Court. Thus the Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions and may in
proper case reverse its previous decisions. This article examines some of the
aspects of this doctrine and its applicability in India.
Principle of Stare decisis
Stare Decisis asserts that subordinate
courts observe and follow decisions on similar matters made previously by superior
courts. Once a court has issued a legal ruling, that court and inferior courts
within the same jurisdiction must abide by that ruling and apply it to similar
cases in future ruling.
Origin of Stare Decisis
The doctrine of Stare Decisis
originated in the twelfth century England during the reign of King Henry II.
Henry ordered the classification of English Common Law drawn from the customs
of the English people. Under this reform , judges were given the authority to
draw from old decisions and make them stand as precedents for future rulings.
This integrated and stabilized many regional traditions into a single effective
legal system.
When the United States became
independent of Great Britain in 1776, it inherited the doctrine of Stare
Decisis and an English common law tradition. By the mid-eighteenth century, the
ready circulation of printed court decisions allowed courts to know how other
courts were ruling. This helped to reinforce the doctrine of Stare Decisis.
Stare Decisis Vs. Precedent
Most often the terms Stare Decisis
and precedent were used alongside each other and in similar ways.These terms
are closely related ,yet there is an important distinction between the two.Stare Decisis is a doctrine
and abstract concept that
describes the idea of a prior ruling having future consequences. A precedent is
not abstract at all, it is the actual decision that will carry forward in
judicial rulings. Stare Decisis is a principle whereas precedents are actual
rulings. By integrating the principle of Stare Decisis and the reality of
precedents , a legal system has been created which is strong , flexible and
enduring.
Stare decisis and Art.141 of the Constitution.
The doctrine of Stare decisis is
embodied in Art.141 of the Constitution. Art.141 states that law declared by
the Supreme Court is binding on all courts other than the Supreme Court. Supreme
Court is not bound by its own previous decisions as it has the absolute power
to reverse its previous decisions if found inconsistent with the law.Thus the
doctrine of Stare decisis is followed in India to a limited extent.This is in
line with modern practice. Too rigid adherence to precedents may lead to
injustice. Not only that it is improper and unwise to keep nation’s Constitution
in constant uncertainty in the guise of judicial review. Such a stand will
retard all legislative actions which the parliament has effected after due
deliberations.” It should only be done when there is a national crisis of great
movement to the life, liberty and safety of the country and its nations are at
stake or the basic direction of the nation itself is in peril of a shake up.”[1]
Objectives of the doctrine of Stare Decisis.
Stare Decisis refers to the principle
that subordinate courts must adhere to previous judicial decisions of Supreme
Court in cases where the same legal issues are brought before them. The concept
of Stare Decisis has four main objectives which are –
1.
It
instils confidence in the people that if they comply with law, law will protect
them.
2.
It
encourages out of court settlement through dispute resolution mechanisms. Since
the parties to a dispute know the outcome of similar legal issue, they might
resort to private dispute settlement which is time saving and cost effective
rather than relying on traditional court procedures which are time consuming
sometimes taking the whole life time and beyond, very much expensive and
cumbersome.
3.
The
doctrine of Stare Decisis reduces the burden on the courts as well. It
eliminates the requirement to litigate again in the cases where decisions have
been declared by competent courts.
4.
It
strengthens people’s confidence in the judiciary as the doctrine puts certain
restrictions and constraints on the powers of the judges. The judges of
subordinate courts can never deliver a decision against a decision made by Supreme
Court on a similar case.
Advantages and disadvantages of the doctrine.
Advantages: -
It reduces further litigation on the
same matter and saves time and energy of the judiciary.
It avoids possibility of arbitrariness
and bias and facilitates fair and just adjudication as judges are bound by
established precedents.
It ensures confidence of the people
in the judicial system.
It also brings stablilty, certainty
and consistency in the law.
Disadvantages: -
The doctrine can hinder the all round
progress of law. It may affect proper interpretation of the law as per changing
cultural, social, economic and other circumstances.
It is considered a doctrine that is
against the principles of democracy as it allows unelected judges to make law
through their judgements.
The doctrine of Stare Decisis may
lead to the propagation of certain cases which might have been wrongly
declared.
Binding nature of the doctrine under
Art. 141.
All the courts within the territory
of India are bound by the decisions declared by the Apex court However, the
Supreme Court is not bound by its own previous decisions.
A judgement passed by the higher
court can be considered as a precedent only when such judgement is capable of
resolving a legal issue.
It is the Ratio decidendi of a case that is binding on the Courts. Ratio decidendi of judgement is the
principle of law adopted having regard to the line of reasoning of judge which
binds in future cases. Ratio decidendi
can only be laid down after discussion of relevant provisions and case law on the
subject. Where judgement is given without hearing other party without any line
of reasoning and certain conclusions are arrived at without any reference to
any case law , it would be difficult to hold such judgement having binding force.[2]
Ratio decidendi
of a judgement is not to be discerned from a stray wordor phrase read in
isolation.It has to be found out only by reading the entire judgement.[3]
A stray sentence in a judgement without
a focussed argument cannot be considered as the ratio of such judgement.[4]
In certain cases, the bench might be
of different opinions and in such cases ,the opinion of the majority shall
prevail as a precedent.
Non binding nature under Art.141
As per the doctrine of Stare Decisis,
Obiter dicta of a case is not binding.
Decision declared per incuriam is not binding.
Decision rendered sub silentio is not used as a precedent.
Sub silentio means when a question of
law was not correctly and reasonably determined.
The decisions that are not expressed
properly are not binding.
Stare Decisis in common law and civil
law.
Unlike the common law system, civil
law jurisdictions do not apply stare decisis.
In a common law system, according to
the doctrine of judicial precedents (stare decisis) previous decisions by the
judiciary is the source for their future decisions and this is what is called
case law- finding the facts, finding the law and applying the law to the facts
according to past cases. What has been decided in the past rules the future
verdicts for every person. That is the law.
In the Civil Law system, practice of
law is based on what a Code or written law says. Written law includes the
Constitution, Laws by the Parliament and Executive.
Conclusion;
Stare Decisis creates important
uniformity in a common law system by providing the judges with a common and
evolving collection of decisions that will be applied in all future cases. Stare
Decisis also limits a judge from having too much autonomy and making
inequitable rulings. Stare Decisis and binding precedent should constrain a
court for ruling differently if the evidence against the defendants is the same.
This uniformity in application is the greatest advantage of Stare Decisis
because it promotes equal protection of the law.
Article Information
DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS
Authors: JOY M G
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/03/01
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.