2265154
| Questão | Responda |
| OBITER DICTER -Comments made by a Judge (other things said) -Are not binding but can be persuasive (especially if said by a senior judge | R v HOWE : 'Duress is not a defence in attempted murder' R v GOTTS : (persuaded by the obiter in howe) Ratio- 'Duress id not a defence in attempted murder'' |
| RATIO DECIDENDI -Legal reason for the decision -Its the part of judgement that is applied at a later case. -Binding to lower court judges to which it was made -Persuasive to higher court judges to which it was made. | DONOGHUE + STEVENSON : Ratio- 'Manufacturers owe a duty of care to the consumer of the products' |
| ORIGIONAL PRECEDENT -A similar case has never been previously decided -The judges decision forms a new precedent for all courts lower in the hierarchy -Judges will look at the most similar cases to make their decision. | DPP v SMITH: HUNTER v CANARY WHARF Ltd and DOCKLANDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION : -You can not be sued if there is a loss of TV signal |
| BINDING PRECEDENT -When a ratio is made by a judge in a higher court and the judges in the lower courts are bound by the same decision (only if the case facts are similar enough and it still stands if the lower court judge disagrees) | R v DUDLEY and STEPHEN : Necessity can not be used as a defence to murder. |
| A COURT LOWER in the HIERARCHY -Higher courts may consider and be persuaded by a ratio or even obiter made in a lower court and decide it's the correct principle/ | R v R : (CoA)- husbands can be guilty of raping their wives (HoL)- persuaded by CoA |
| PRIVY COUNCIL -Final appeal court -Decisions are persuasive (supreme) -Not part of the hierarchy so not binding | ATTORNEY GENERAL for Jersey v HOLLEY : -Characteristics can't be taken into account when the issue of provocation to murder is raised R v JAMES : CoA was persuaded by the case above |
| DECISION of COURTS in other COUNTRIES : -More likely to happen in countries that use similar common law; Canada Australia New Zeeland | Re S : American case (Re AC) was followed by the CoA 'A caesarean section could be lawfully performed on a competent woman without consent.' |
| DISSENTING JUDGEMENTS -CoA + Supreme (if a unanimous decision cant be made a majority is used) -The decanting judge/s should give a reason (This reason can be persuasive in future cases) | R v BROWN : Consent is no defence to sado-masochism (Slyn + Mustil didn't agree) R v WILLSON : Persuaded by the dissenting opinions. |
| *ANDERTON v RYAN -D bought a camera which they suspected to be stolen -Found Not Guilty as it was be 'asinine' to comit an uncomitable offence | R v SHIVPURI -Delivered a powder he suspected was drugs -Found guilty (first case to use practice statement) |
| *RONDEL v WORSLEY -Barristers are immune from negligence for their conduct in a case in court (claims made due to a barrister not asking all the questions) | HALL v SIMONS -Claims against solicitors -The rule relating to immunity of an advocate in respect of and relating to conduct of legal proceedings should no longer be maintained |
| *MPC v CALDWELL -Man set is boss' hotel on fire when he was intoxicated (10 residents inside) -A person is reckless as to weather property is damaged where: -does an act creating devious risk -not given any thought to risk | R v R+G -Boys camped without permission and caused £1m of damages with a fire they left -A person acts 'recklessly' with respects to: -circumstances when he is aware of the risk -a result if he knew the risk will occur |
| *ADDIE v DUMBRECK -Child died when climbing on haulage apparatus on trespassed land -No duty of care was owed to trespassers to ensure that they were safe when coming on to the land. The duty was to not inflict harm wilfully. | BRITISH RAILWAY BOARD v HERRINGTON -Young boy electrocuted on live train line after taking a short cut through a broken fence to the park -BRB knew about this fence and did nothing about if -It was said that they owed a duty of common humanity to trespassers. |
Quer criar seus próprios Flashcards gratuitos com GoConqr? Saiba mais.