The doctrain of Judicial Peredent is that, to make common law fair judges in their rulings should follow past decisions made by other judges in similar cases. This is based on the saying ” stand what has been decided and do not unsettle the established”. Judicial percedent is known as “the tool of common law”. But judges in their ruling should follow Hierarchy of English court system and the materiality of the cases.
The cases may be binding or persuasive. That means in rulling all cases may not be followed by judges. Judges should consider three matters.
1. Ratio Deciendi
2. Obiter dicta
Ratio Deciendi means the principle on which the case established. It’s capable of forming the binding precedent. That means this sort of cases should follow during ruling by Judges.
Obiter dicta are not the subject of the judicial decision. They are persuasive rather than binding. The arguments and reasoning of dissenting opinion also constitute obiter dicta.
Materiality means the jest of both cases should be same. Other wise judges can’t follow those rulings while he/she giving word on any cases.
Judges also should follow hierarchy of the English Court system. The highest court in the hierarchy is House Of Lords then Court of Appeal then High court/Crown court then Country court then Magistrate court.
A judge from highest point of the hierarchy can’t consider any decision from lower court.
For following previous cases sometime its become rigid and inflexible. Because its may be possible that in previous jurisdiction judge may was wrong. To furnish this kind of problems there are another system in English Case law that is Equity.