Kinds of Precedent Authoritative Precedent

Kinds Of Precedent
Authoritative Precedent
Authoritative Precedent is one which judges must follow whether they approve it
or not .Authoritative Precedent are the legal sources of law .
An authoritative precedent comes from the superior court or senior court followed
by its subordinate court.
A lower court /Inferior court are bound to follow the rulings of the higher court if
the Judge in the present case disagrees with the legal principle.
The supreme court is authoritative for all courts in India&High Court to all
subordinate courts .
A court is bound to follow precedent of that Jurisdiction only if it is directly in
point .”Directly in Point “ Means
a) Question resolved in precedent case same as resolved in pending case
b) Resolution of that question necessary to the disposition o the precedent case .
c) Significant facts of precedent case present in pending case.
d) No additional facts in pending case to be treated as significant
Authoritative Precedent in England are the decisions of superior courts of justice.
Authoritative Precedent are of 2 kinds
I. Absolutely Authoritative Precedent
In this case they have to be followed by the judges even if they do not approve of them. They
are entitled to implicit obedience.
II. Conditional Authoritative Precedent
In this case the courts can disregard them under certain circumstances .Ordinarily they are
binding but under special circumstances they can be disregarded.The court is entitled to do so
if the decision is a wrong one The decision must be contrary to law and reason.
A conditional Precedent can be disregarded either by dissenting or by overruling

Overrulling :In this case the precedent overruled is authoritatively pronounced to be wrong
so that it cannot be followed by the court in the future
Dissenting ;A court declines to follow the precedent and lays down law in a different sense
The conflict thus created can be resolved only by a superior tribunal when a occasion
arises.Till that is done the law remains in a state of uncertainity .
۩ In India , the decision of single Judge of a High Court is only conditionally
authoritative and may be dissented from by another single Judge or it may be overruled by a
Division Bench .
If one Division Bench dissents from another Division Bench ;Procedure to be followed.
-[Seshamma Vs. Venkata Narasimha Rao (1940 ) 1 MLJ 400 (FB)]
“While a Judge of a High Court sitting alone is not bound on a question of law
by the decision of another Judge sitting alone, this principle goes further .The Divison Bench
is the final court of appeal in an Indian High Court unless the case is reffered to a full bench ,
and one division bench should regard itself bound by the decision of another division bench
on a question of law .In England where there is the Court of Appeal , the divisional courts
follow the decisions of other divisional courts on the grounds of judicial comity .If a division
bench does not accept as correct the decision on a question of law of another division bench ,
the only right and proper course to adopt is to refer the matter to a full bench for which the
rules of this court provide .If this course is not adopted the courts subordinate to the courts
are left without guidance.”
Question –Whether the decision of a full bench of the High Court can be overruled by
another Full Bench consisting of larger number of judges –[Ningappa Vs Emperor
(941)Bom 408]
Chief Justice Beamount expressed the view that the decision of a full bench ,
unitil it is overruled by the privy council , is absolutely authoritative.” There is no doubt that
a full bench can overrule a division bench and that full bench must consist of 3 or more
judges ; but it would seem anamolous to hold that a later full bench can overrule an earlier
full bench merely because the later bench consistes of more judges than earlier .If that were
the rule , it would mean that a bench of seven judges , by a majority of four to three could
overrule a unanimous decision of abench of six judges though all judges were of coordinate
jurisdiction.”
[Raja of Mandasa Vs. Jagammaykula , IR 1932 Mad 612 ]-Madras High Court –View –
A full bench may be overruled by a numerically stronger full bench.-Wallace , J
“The rules on the appellate side permit a division bench to refer any matter to a full
bench and there are precedents for a division bench referring the decision of a full bench for
consideration to a larger bench .”The proper procedure to be adopted is “to refer the matter to
the chief Justice and it is then for him to consider whether the question should be
reconsidered by a larger bench .”
Cessante ratione legis cessat lex ipsa –means when reason for any particular law ceases so
does the law itself.Thus according to Black stone –A precedent must be followed if they
aren’t absurd /unjust.
۩ A court of superior Jurisdiction can overrule the decision of a subordinate court .A

court of subordinate jurisdiction can simply dissent from another court.ie a coordinate court
can refuse to follow the precedent of another court and also lay down a different rule on the
same point .The conflicts B/W the 2 coordinate courts can be resolved by a superior court
۩ In India , the decision of Single judge of a High Court is only a conditionally
authoritative precedent .Another judge of the same High Court can differ from him .A
division bench of the same High Court can overrule the same .A decision of the full bench of
same court is binding on a bench consisting of two or more judges.
[K.C.Nambiar Vs. State of Madras AIR 1953 Mad 351]-CHIEF Justice Subba Rao
“A single Judge is bound by the decision of a division bench exercising appellate
jurisdiction .If there is a conflict of bench decisions , he should refer the case to a bench of
two judges who may refer it to a full bench .A single judge cannt differ from a division bench
unless a full bench or supreme court has overruled that decision specifically or laid down a
different law on the same point .But he can’t ignore a bench decision on the ground that some
observations of supreme court made ina different context might indicate a different line of
reasoning .A division bench must ordinarily respect another division bench of coordinate
jurisdiction ; but if it differs , the case should be reffered to a full bench.”
۩ In England The decisions of H.O.L. are absolutely binding on all courts &H.O.L
itself bound by its own decisions The court of Appeal is bound by its own decisions or by
those of coordinate jurisdiction .There are 3 exception to this rule .
1. If there are two conflicting decisions of a court , it must decide which of the two it
should follow .
2. If the decision of a court is in conflict with the H.O.L , it must refuse to follow it
even if it is not expressly overruled by the decision of H.O.L.
3. The court is not bound to follow a decision of its own if it is satisfied that the decision
was given per incuriam .

Kinds of Precedent Authoritative Precedent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kinds of Precedent Authoritative Precedent

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kinds of Precedent Authoritative Precedent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kinds Of Precedent

A conditional Precedent can be disregarded either by dissenting or by overruling

۩ A court of superior Jurisdiction can overrule the decision of a subordinate court .A

You might also like