Basics of the Doctrine of Stare Decisis

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Today, I will talk about a very important principle of law, the principle of stare decisis. I will discuss the same with a jurisprudential perspective to provide conceptual clarity in relation to the doctrine of stare decisis.

 

MEANING

 

Stare decisis is a Latin term that literally means “to stand by things decided.” Essentially, it is a “doctrine of precedent, under which it is necessary for a court to follow earlier judicial decisions when the same points arise again in litigation.”

 

It is often said that “a case is only authority for what it actually decides,” but “when a point or principle of law has been once officially decided or settled by the ruling of a competent court in a case in which it is directly and necessarily involved, it will no longer be considered as open to examination…. unless it be for urgent reasons and in exceptional cases.”

 

IMPORTANCE

 

It is pertinent to note that “the principle of stare decisis applies with special force to the construction of constitutions, and an interpretation once deliberately put upon the provisions of such an instrument should not be departed from without grave reasons.”

 

The importance of the principle of stare decisis is that it provides stability, permanence and certainty to the construction and interpretation placed by the judiciary in relation to various laws. When meaning of legal provisions has been freed from doubt by way of a judicial decision, then such authoritative interpretation ought to be adhered to.

 

As most of you would be knowing that there are two parts of any judicial pronouncement, ratio decidendi which is the binding principle of law on which a decision is based, and obiter dictum which is the portion of the judgment that is not binding and may contain observations that are not relevant to the case.

 

WORD OF CAUTION AND ENDING REMARKS

 

Further, the principle of stare decisis is a sub-set of the Doctrine of Precedent. Though the principle of stare decisis is important, yet the judges must be meticulous in ascertaining that whether a previous judicial ruling is applicable to facts of a particular case or not. Rigid adherence to this principle may lead to injustice and as I had quoted that “a case is only authority for what it actually decides” must not be forgotten. These legal doctrines are meant to be aids to interpretation. Fulfilling the dictum of these maxims and legal doctrines can never be an end in itself. What is most important is the development of law. If by applying the principle of stare decisis, a judge feels that rather than developing the law, it would lead to a regressive approach, the judge must take recourse to other principles of interpretation and apply his mind to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case at hand.

 

Countless number of pages could be written on the Doctrine of Stare Decisis, but the purpose of the present post is to simply briefly introduce the concept to the audience. Thus, I hope that the basic meaning of the Doctrine of Stare Decisis is clear by now.

 

Books Referred to:

 

1. Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition.

2. Handbook on the Construction and Interpretation of the Laws, Henry Campbell Black, Second Edition.