Mount Kenya University

Parklanda law campus

Group four 1.1 A
Blaw 1104
Legal systems and methods
Ms Cynthia Njoroge

Understanding Stare Decisis and Judicial Precedent

Stare decisis, meaning in Latin “to stand by things decided,” is a legal principle that directs
courts to adhere to previous judgments (or judgments of higher tribunals) while resolving a case
with allegedly comparable facts.

There are horizontal and vertical components to the stare decisis concept. Absent extraordinary
circumstances, a court that upholds the principle of “horizontal stare decisis” will follow its own
earlier decisions (e.g., the Supreme Court follows a legal precedent unless it has become too
difficult for lower courts to apply).

On the other hand, vertical stare decisis obligates lower courts to adhere strictly to rulings made
by higher courts within the same jurisdiction For example, a federal court of appeals must abide
by decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court, the federal court of last resort.

Judicial precedent refers to a court decision that is considered an authority for deciding
subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts, or similar legal issues. Precedent is
incorporated into the doctrine of stare decisis and requires courts to apply the law in the same
manner to cases with the same facts. Some judges have stated that precedent ensures that
individuals in similar situations are treated alike instead of based on a particular judge’s personal
views. Judicial precedent provides possible principles, rules, or standards to govern judicial
decisions in future cases with arguably similar facts.
Contribution To Development Of Law And Jurisprudence

1. Promoting consistency and predictability

Stare decisis is essential because it provides stability and predictability in the law. When courts
follow the precedent set by previous decisions, it ensures that similar cases are decided in the
same way, which promotes consistency and fairness. Additionally, it saves time and resources by
preventing the need to re-litigate issues that have already been decided.For example, in Kenya,
the landmark case of Republic v. Karisa Chengo & 2 Others [2017] eKLR illustrates how the
High Court meticulously followed precedents set by the Court of Appeal in its ruling on the
admissibility of evidence.

2. Promoting equality and fairness

Precedent plays an instrumental role in the development of law and society. It ensures equality
and fairness by means of treating similar cases in a similar manner. This brings the certainty of
law and upholds the confidence of the citizens in the justice delivery system. With respect to the
judiciary, it acts as a guideline to decide future cases based on similar facts. It ensures that the
lower courts adhere to the interpretation of the law by the superior court in line with the
changing needs of the society. For example the case of R. v. Ngoya (2016): In this case, the
Court of Appeal reinforced the doctrine of stare decisis by referring to previous decisions
concerning the election petitions in political contexts. Such enforcement boosts public
confidence in the electoral process by ensuring fairness based on established legal standards.

3. Adaptability and evolution of law

One of the hallmark strengths of the common law system is its inherent flexibility, allowing it to
adapt more swiftly to changes in society, technology, and the economy. Common law is
inherently flexible; it evolves over time as societal values and norms change. Courts can
reinterpret previous decisions in light of contemporary circumstances. For instance, in the United
Kingdom, the case of R v. Brown (1993) illustrates this well. The court’s decision rested on
earlier precedents concerning consent in criminal law. Yet, the criticisms surrounding the
judgment led to discussions about the application of the principles of personal autonomy and the
role of societal morals in legal judgments. Since common law evolves through judicial decisions,
courts can respond to new scenarios without the need for legislative intervention. This means
that common law can adjust to new challenges and situations more rapidly.

4. Development of a detailed Jurisprudence

The common law system's reliance on case law and judicial precedence creates a rich body of
jurisprudence that offers detailed guidance on how laws are applied in specific situations. This
can lead to a deeper understanding of legal principles as they are applied in practice, providing a
level of specificity and nuance that broad statutory provisions may lack. Judges in common law
systems have the opportunity to develop and refine legal doctrines over time, contributing to a
sophisticated and comprehensive legal framework. A significant case in this context is Donoghue
v. Stevenson (1932). The House of Lords established the modern concept of negligence in this
case, impacting countless subsequent rulings. The case introduced the principle that one must
take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that could foreseeably harm others, thereby
altering the landscape of tort law and encouraging a more individualistic approach to liability.

5. Protection of rights

Common law systems have been praised for their role in developing and protecting individual
rights and freedoms. Through landmark judicial decisions by the higher courts, which set judicial
precedence through the principle of stare decisis, common law courts have often been at the
forefront of expanding civil liberties and human rights, providing a mechanism for legal
evolution. Example of Precedent in Action: Consider the case of R v. R (1991) in the UK, where
the House of Lords overruled centuries of common law precedent that regarded marital rape as
impossible. This decision demonstrated how stare decisis can both maintain and challenge
existing societal norms by allowing the judiciary to adapt legal interpretations to evolving social
values.

6 Judicial efficiency

Judicial efficiency is a significant outcome and function of stare decisis within common law
systems, facilitating swift, consistent, and cost-effective judicial processes. Stare decisis
contributes to efficiency by providing a structured approach for courts to resolve cases with
reference to established precedents rather than starting afresh each time. Stare decisis plays a
critical role in judicial efficiency by streamlining legal reasoning, reducing the need for
redundant arguments, and lowering the likelihood of appeals. Through adherence to precedent,
the judiciary can address cases quickly, predictably, and consistently, allowing resources to be
allocated more effectively and promoting an efficient legal system accessible to all. By reducing
case backlogs, encouraging settlements, and promoting procedural clarity, stare decisis
strengthens the judiciary's capacity to handle complex and novel cases, further advancing both
the stability and development of the legal system.

7 Influence on the development

The concept of development as it relates to stare decisis emphasizes the evolution of legal
principles over time. Stare decisis, or the doctrine of precedent, requires courts to follow
previously decided cases to maintain consistency and stability within the legal system. However,
this doesn't imply that the law remains static. In fact, development through stare decisis allows
the law to adapt to societal changes, advancements, and new understandings, which is
particularly relevant in areas like international development law, where evolving global
standards may impact domestic rulings. Through development within stare decisis, courts uphold
stability while progressively molding the law to meet evolving societal needs, which is vital for
addressing the complexities of modern issues

Conclusion

Stare decisis and judicial precedent play a fundamental role in the development of common law,
ensuring consistency, adaptability, and scholarly engagement with legal issues. The evolution of
legal principles through judicial decisions contributes significantly to the growth of law and
jurisprudence, demonstrating how past rulings can shape contemporary legal frameworks.

Collected and compiled:

Patrick Kabue BLAW/2024/53008

Yvonne Luciana BLAW/2024/54013

Joan Wandia BLAW/2024/54407

Alexia Osebe BLAW/2024/53637

Patience Aloo BLAW/2024/49557

Rono Kimutai BLAW/2023/59492

Onyango Gravin Gift BLAW/2024/50278