There are two types of use of the word ‘precedent’ in law. Precedent that must be applied or followed is known as binding precedent (alternately metaphorically precedent, mandatory or binding authority, etc.). Under the doctrine of stare decisis, a lower court must honor findings of law made by a higher court that is within the appeals path of cases the court hears. In state and federal courts in the United States of America, jurisdiction is often divided geographically among local trial courts, several of which fall under the territory of a regional appeals court. All appellate courts fall under a highest court (sometimes but not always called a “supreme court”). By definition, decisions of lower courts are not binding on courts higher in the system, nor are appeals court decisions binding on local courts that fall under a different appeals court. Further, courts must follow their own proclamations of law made earlier on other cases, and honor rulings made by other courts in disputes among the parties before them pertaining to the same pattern of facts or events, unless they have a strong reason to change these rulings.
Justice McHugh of the High Court of Australia in relation to precedence remarked in Perre v Apand:
That is the way of the common law, the judges preferring to go ‘from case to case, like the ancient Mediterranean mariners, hugging the coast from point to point, and avoiding the dangers of the open sea of system or science’.
The second type of precedent refers to a document which is being used as an example of a document that is used in the law to solve a particular problem or address a specific need, usually for the client of a law firm. If you would like more information about legal precedents, or you would like assistance with a legal matter please do not hesitate to contact us.