The Doctrine The doctrine of precedent is based on the need for certainty in the
law. It means that lawyers can properly advise their clients on the
basis that like cases will be treated alike, rather than judges making
their own random decisions which nobody could predict. This helps
people plan their affairs. According to Lord Denning, ‘It is the
foundation of our system of case law’. However, Denning was ‘against
is its too rigid application - a rigidity which insists that a bad
precedent must necessarily be followed’.
It is the doctrine’s rigidity that can prevent developments to meet
the changing needs of society. However, this was recognised in the
House of Lords 1996 Practice Statement.
In addition, judges in the lower courts are adept at avoiding the
doctrine’s rigidity. A judge may distinguish the awkward precedent on
its facts - arguing that the facts of the case under consideration are
different in some important way from those of the previous case and
therefore the rule does not apply.
A precedent may be distinguished on a point of law; by arguing that
the legal question answered by the precedent is not the same as that
asked in the instant case.
Courts may distinguish a precedent by stating that the precedent has
been superseded by more recent decisions, and is therefore outdated.
Courts may give the precedent a very narrow ratio decidendi or argue
that the precedent has no clear ratio decidendi, for example because
the ratio of one judge in a case is different from others in the same
case.
Courts may cla...
... middle of paper ...
...t of the Human Rights Act 1998 is as yet uncertain. But there
is no doubt that case law will be developed according to society’s
changing needs, for example that our privacy should be respected.
Before the Act, the courts followed Kaye v Robinson in denying the
right to privacy. However, in the ground-breaking case of Douglas v
Hello Ltd. Here, Sedley LJ said that there is ‘a right of privacy
which English law will today recognise and, where appropriate,
protect’. That said, there is, as yet, no tort of privacy.
Lastly, there are a number of ‘morality cases’ where the changing
mores of society are recognised. For example, in Gillick v West
Norfolk AHA, the issue was whether it was morally acceptable to
prescribe contraceptives to under 16 year olds without parental
consent. It was and this reflects how we live today.
Theme in “Defender of the Faith” can be interpreted in many varying ways, some of which are life-long lessons and others to the relation between faith and the individual.
The application of these laws in the real world has become a hot debate as to whether the Australian legal system is based on justice and fairness. This is strongly related to the judge-made laws. Judge-made laws or common laws rely on the doctrine of precedent. This means that the decisions made by judges in the courts are based on previous cases that have similarities with other cases. The decisions in the doctrine of precedent are normally based on the higher authority court decision.
The Doctrine of Ethos states that music effects character and emotion of man by way of morals or ethics. It was arranged into certain scales, each with a certain characteristic. Specific scales were said to be able to inspire rage or sadness. Some were said to inspire happiness, and one was even said to weaken the mind due to its simplicity. Greek music, of which the Doctrine of Ethos specifically talked about, wasn’t just solely instrumental. Improvising, they usually incorporated lyrics and even dance. Music was studied by the Greeks on a level that would be considered excessive in our society by all but our musicologists, ethnomusicologist, music theorists, and a small minority that take their love of music to more than just an aesthetic level. In our world, a world of empiricism and skepticism, the Doctrine of Ethos may sound a bit hard to believe. It may even sound magical and mystical, but I feel that it has some deep roots in truth. Philosophers, musicians, and even the layman have all theorized about the effect of music on the mind, body, and soul. After all, as William Congreve said in his The Mourning Bride, “Music hath charms to soothe a savage breast, to soften rocks, or bend a knotted oak.”
Four movements, now heresies, of the past each adopted one of these four views mentioned previously. They are: Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Apollinarianism, and Arianism. Nestorianism and Eutychianism fall under the controversy of the relationship between the two natures. The controversy of Nestorianism arose over the propriety of the term theotokos (“God-bearing”) as a description of Mary. At the Council of Chalcedon in 428 Nestorius gave his view of theotokos to which he held and overly dividing view of the two natures of Christ. Nestorius felt that the term was of doubtful propriety unless the term anthropotokos (“human-bearing”) was also used. Nestorius was later condemned when Cyril of Alexandria; who held the belief in Christ having one nature got involved. Nestorius’ pronouncement towards the birth of Christ caused Cyril to oppose him. Nestorius said that God cannot have a mother; no woman can give birth to God. Cyril of Alexandria suggested that Nestorius was proposing that Jesus has two natures joined in a purely moral union. After Nestorianism came Eutychianism. Eutyches who was repeatedly summoned to the standing Synod of Constantinople in 448, finally appeared and stated his position whereas Christ has two natures before the incarnation, that was but one afterwards. The result of the Synod was the Eutyches was deposed and excommunicated and the one- nature doctrine rejected.
In order to understand divine command theory we must first understand the nature of God and Morality. So we will start by taking a look at what makes an action moral. Once we understand what makes an action moral, we can then try to understand the author's’ viewpoint on the divine command theory of ethics. Understanding the viewpoint will allow us to dissect the author’s viewpoints and come up with counter-arguments that the author must then contend with.
should be decided by the same court justice to provide fair punishment among the accused.
1.The strict supremacy of statute over judicial decisions and a tradition of literalism in statutory interpretation, 2. Where no legislation exists, the courts are bound by the doctrine of precedent in accordance with a strict hierarchy of judicial authority, 3. In the absence of a relevant precedent, the judges will be guided by legal principle and reasoning by analogy, and 4. There is clear way of distinguishing the ratio of a case…
The Doctrine of Salvation (Soteriology). God provides us with everything we need; we see this in Genesis where he provided Adam with everything he needed. Jesus became a man by reincarnation; a verse to support this is John 1:14 “
In today’s society, Christianity is plagued with many disagreements about how to deal with current issues in society. These problems arise from the fact that Christians have the same fundamental beliefs, but they often disagree on the details. This is the reason why there is a panoply of denominations in the Christian faith. The way that many of the factions in Christianity interpret the word of God can be categorized into different styles of gospel, such as evangelicalism and fundamentalism. One such category that is beginning to gain popularity in today’s society, often taught in megachurches, is Prosperity Gospel. Prosperity Gospel, also called the “Health and Wealth Gospel” by Scot McKnight’s internet article “The Problem for the Prosperity Gospel,” is the belief that if humans adhere to God’s will, then He will in turn bless them with prosperous lives (McKnight). This prosperity often comes in the form of health and wealth according to many megachurches that preach this gospel. In times of economic strife, the prosperity gospel offers comfort in the hopes of having a prosperous future. It is also suspected that Prosperity Gospel has also become an outlet for the people who have a considerable amount of money as a means to justify their wealth. Whatever the reason for believing this gospel, it is important to remember that Prosperity Gospel is just one of the many ways that we can interpret the teachings of the Bible.
Is it possible to understand the gospel message, serve as an officer in a church, be sure of your salvation, and yet still not get into heaven when you die? Matthew, one of the original twelve disciples, answered this question clearly. Yes, on “that day”, many will stand before God and hear Him say, “I know you not; depart from me.” (Matthew 7:23 KJV)
Partisanship, it was concluded, has a strong effect on judicial decisions for criminal cases. Judges, appointed with strong Liberal ties, are 13% more likely to vote in favor of the accused in criminal non-charter cases and 21% more likely to vote in favor of the accused in criminal charter cases, compare to strong Conservative judges. Partisanship clearly matters, in criminal cases, however, it is important to note that there was no effect in family or human rights cases. Also, while partisanship has an effect, there is an effect of having judges from different political affiliations sitting together on panels with each other. For example, “A vote for the woman in a family law case issue, such as child custody or spousal support was 19 per cent less likely from a judge with Liberal ties if he or she sat on a panel with a judge with PC ties...” This suggests that there is some mitigations of partisanship that arises out of group discussion and decision
As Christians, we have many beliefs that shape the way we live and view life. Doctrine explains the core beliefs of the Christian life. Christian beliefs are also expressed through the Apostles Creed, which is a creedal summary of the Holy Bible. Through the Apostles Creed, we see that Christians believe in the doctrine of revelation from God, the Holy nature and attributes of God, and the unique doctrine of the Trinity. The core beliefs of Christianity provide a foundation to stand firm and a direction in which to run.
Consideration is often defined as “a detriment voluntarily incurred by the promisee… or a benefit conferred on the promisor in exchange for the promise.”1 Whilst the doctrine of consideration does, in some cases, cause parties to experience injustice, sometimes something that the courts fail to resolve, consideration is a crucial element to the formation of a legally binding contract. This paper will not only explain why the High Court should not abolish the requirement for consideration but will also highlight its usefulness in contract formation.
Plato defines rhetoric as “the art of ruling the minds of men” (Bloom). The sophists were instructors in the disciplines of rhetoric and overall excellence. Their teachings thrived in the fifth century B.C. Through the work of Protagoras, Gorgias, Antiophon, and other sophists, the people of Athens gained higher education and stopped accepting everything they were taught as absolute fact. This questioning of traditional philosophical schools eventually led to the emergence of other ways of thought such as skepticism.
This has been neglected almost entirely in the past. We have studied the making of law sedulously. It seems to have been assumed that, when made, law will enforce itself. This is true not only of legislation but also of that more important part of our law which rests in the reports. Almost the entire energy of our judicial system is employed in working out a consistent, logical, and precise body of precedents. The important part of our system is not the trial judge who dispenses justice to litigants but the judge of the appellate court who uses the litigation as a means of developing the law; and we judge the system by the output of written opinions and not by the actual results interpretations in concrete causes. But the life of the law is in its enforcement. Serious scientific study of how to make our huge annual output of legislation and judicial interpretation effective is imperative[ Pound, R., 1907In D. A. Hedin (Ed.), Green Bag 19 ed,