3. ● The doctrine of stare decisis states that
when a court has set forth a legal
principle, that court and all lower courts
under it will apply that principle in
future cases where the facts are
substantially the same.
● It requires courts to decide cases
consistently with their past decisions
involving the same or similar facts and
legal principles.
● Also, applying the doctrine of stare
decisis, Lower Courts are bound by
decisions of Higher courts in the same
jurisdiction.
● It supports the idea of fairness and
provides certainty in the law.
MEANING
&
EXPLANATION
4. The doctrine of stare decisis can be illustrated with a
case example:
In 1965, the United States Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Griswold v.
Connecticut, ruling that a married couple has a right of privacy that cannot be
infringed upon by a state law making it a crime to use contraceptives. While the right
of privacy is not specifically guaranteed by the Constitution, the Griswold Court
reasoned that it emanates from certain guarantees in the Bill of Rights. Griswold then
paved the way for the Supreme Court's historic ruling in the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade.
In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court went on to hold that the right of privacy
encompasses a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.
Griswold v. Connecticut served as an important precedent in the Roe v. Wade decision.
5. The doctrine of stare decisis
makes the legal principle set
forth in Griswold applicable to
future cases like Roe v Wade.
6. The doctrine of stare decisis operates
both horizontally and vertically.
● Horizontal stare decisis refers to a
court adhering to its own
precedent. It is a discretionary
doctrine
● A court engages in vertical stare
decisis when it applies precedent
from a higher court. It is a
mandatory doctrine.
Branches
7. Kimble v. Marvel
EnterPrises
Stare decisis “promotes the
evenhanded, predictable, and
consistent development of legal
principles fosters reliance on
judicial decisions, and contributes
to the actual and perceived
integrity of the judicial process”.
8. 1. a judge follows the law declared by
judges in higher courts in the same
jurisdiction in cases with similar
facts.
2. a court must give reasons for its
decision in a case. The reasons
should include an explanation of
why the court has chosen to follow,
or not follow, a previous decision
that is similar to the case before it.
Rules that make up
the doctrine of stare
decisis:
9. 3. The decisions of courts outside
Pakistan are not binding on courts of
Pakistan, although they can be used to
assist or guide Pakistan’s courts in
making decisions on new facts.
4. the decision of the highest court within
a particular jurisdiction is final. The
highest court is the court to which the
final appeal lies. The Supreme Court of
Pakistan is the highest court in Pakistan.
CONTINUE...
10. ● Only the reason for a decision (the ratio
decidendi ‘Reason for deciding’) is
binding.
Sir Rupert Cross defined the ratio
decidendi as “any rule expressly or
impliedly treated by the judge as a
necessary step in reaching his
conclusion”.
● Other statements in a case (obiter dicta
– ‘passing remarks’) are not binding, but
only persuasive.
● Obiter dictum is a discussion of side
points or unrelated points.
Ratio Decendi
&
Obiter Dicta
11. Broome v Cassell &
Co (1971)
Decisions by higher
courts are binding on
all lower courts.
12. Doctrine of Stare decisis is
efficient because;
● it minimizes error costs within the
judicial system.
● it maximizes the public good
aspect of judicial decision-making.
● it minimizes the costs of judicial
review.
● it increases societal demand for
judge-made rules relative to
legislatively created rules, and
thereby enhances the power of the
judiciary relative to that of the
legislature.
Efficiency of
Doctrine of Stare
Decisis
13. Basis
It is based on a sound legal
principle that justice and
certainty are required for
established legal principles,
under which rights may accrue,
to be recognised and followed.
14. In the Constitution of Pakistan 1973,
the doctrine of stare decisis is
reflected in Articles 189 and 201,
which read as under:
189. Any decision of the Supreme Court
shall, to the extent that it decides a
question of law or is based upon or
enunciates a principle of law, be binding
on all other courts in Pakistan.
201. Subject to Article 189, any decision
of a High Court shall, to the extent that it
decides a question of law or is based
upon or enunciates a principle of law, be
binding on all courts subordinate to it.
Application of the
Doctrine in
Pakistan
15. Rehan Mahmood Versus Chairman,
Evacuee Trust Property Board
[2020 CLC 1779]
It is the policy of the Courts to stand by the
ratio decidendi, that is, the rule of law and
not to disturb a settled point. This policy of
the Courts is conveniently termed as
doctrine of rule of stare decisis. The
rationale behind this policy is the need to
promote certainty, stability and
predictability of the law.
16. Malik Naseer Versus Wishno Mal
2014 PCRLJ 1496
It is settled principle of criminal
administration of justice that in criminal
cases, every case has to be decided on its
own peculiar facts and circumstances,
however legal principles settled in series of
decisions, which comes within the scope of
stare decisis or having binding effect under
the constitution, has to be followed.
17. The doctrine of stare decisis has
worked well over the centuries
because it gives case law stability and
predictability, while at the same time
allowing for gradual change. There is
stability and predictability because
courts are bound to look to prior cases
in deciding present cases. Much of
what an attorney does is to research
the law to find cases on point and then
predict how a court will decide—or try
to convince the court to decide—based
on those prior cases.
CONCLUSION
