|
Obiter
''Obiter dictum'' (usually used in the plural, ''obiter dicta'') is a Latin phrase meaning "said in passing",''Black's Law Dictionary'', p. 967 (5th ed. 1979). that is, any remark in a legal opinion that is "said in passing" by a judge or arbitrator. It is a concept derived from English common law, whereby a judgment comprises only two elements: ''ratio decidendi'' and ''obiter dicta''. For the purposes of judicial precedent, ''ratio decidendi'' is binding, whereas ''obiter dicta'' are persuasive only. Significance A judicial statement can be ''ratio decidendi'' only if it refers to the crucial facts and law of the case. Statements that are not crucial, or which refer to hypothetical facts or to unrelated law issues, are ''obiter dicta''. ''Obiter dicta'' (often simply '' dicta'', or ''obiter'') are remarks or observations made by a judge that, although included in the body of the court's opinion, do not form a necessary part of the court's decision. In a court opinion, ''obiter d ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Precedent
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of ''stare decisis'' ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability. Precedent is a defining feature that sets common law systems apart from Civil law (legal system), civil law systems. In common law, precedent can either be something courts must follow (binding) or something they can consider but do not have to follow (persuasive). Civil law (legal system), Civil law systems, in contrast, are characterized by comprehensive Code of law, codes and detailed statutes, with no emphasis on precedent, and where judges primarily focus on fact-finding and applying codified law. Courts in common law systems rely heavily on case law, which refers to the collection of precedents and le ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ratio Decidendi
' (; Latin plural ') is a Latin phrase meaning "the reason" or "the rationale for the decision". The ''ratio decidendi'' is "the point in a case that determines the judgement" or "the principle that the case establishes".See Barron's Law Dictionary, page 385 (2d ed. 1984). ''ratio decidendi'' is a legal rule derived from, and consistent with, those parts of legal reasoning within a judgment on which the outcome of the case depends. It is a legal phrase which refers to the legal, moral, political and social principles used by a court to compose the rationale of a particular judgment. Unlike '' obiter dicta'', the ''ratio decidendi'' is, as a general rule, binding on courts of lower and later jurisdiction—through the doctrine of '' stare decisis''. Certain courts are able to overrule decisions of a court of coordinate jurisdiction. However, out of interests of judicial comity, they generally try to follow coordinate rationes. The process of determining the ''ratio decidendi' ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Eugene Wambaugh
Eugene Wambaugh (February 29, 1856 – August 6, 1940) was an American legal scholar. Biography Eugene Wambaugh was born on a farm near Brookville, Ohio on February 29, 1856, to Rev. A. B. Wambaugh and Sarah Wells Wambaugh. He was educated at Harvard (A.B., 1876; LL.B., 1880). Admitted to the Ohio bar in 1880, he practiced law in Cincinnati until 1889. He was professor of law at the State University of Iowa College of Law from 1889 to 1892 and thenceforth at Harvard. From 1906 to 1913, he was a member of the ''American Political Science Review'', and from 1908 to 1912 served as special attorney of the United States Bureau of Corporations. Several universities gave him the honorary degree of LL.D. Wambaugh was an adviser to the State Department on war problems in 1914 and was discharged honorably from the U.S. Army in 1919 with the rank of colonel. He retired from Harvard Law School in 1925. Wambaugh devised the eponymous Wambaugh's Inversion Test, which provides tha ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Central London Property Trust Ltd V High Trees House Ltd
''Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd'' 947KB 130, commonly called ''High Trees'', is a leading opinion in the High Court relating to contract law. It reaffirmed and extended the doctrine of promissory estoppel in the contract law of England and Wales. However, the most significant part of the judgment is ''obiter dictum'' as it relates to hypothetical facts; that is, the landlord did ''not'' seek repayment of the full wartime rent. Denning J held estoppel to be applicable if Facts High Trees House Ltd leased a block of flats in Battersea, London from Central London Property Trust Ltd. The agreement was made in 1937 and specified an annual ground rent of £2,500. The outbreak of World War II in September 1939 led to a downturn in the rental market. High Trees struggled to find tenants for the property and approached Central London Property Trust in January 1940 to request that the rent be lowered. A reduction to £1,250 per year was agreed in writing, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Dictum
In legal writing, a (Latin 'something that has been said'; plural ) is a statement made by a court. It may or may not be binding as a precedent. United States In United States legal terminology, a ''dictum'' is a statement of opinion considered authoritative (although not binding), given the recognized authority of the person who pronounced it. There are multiple subtypes of , although due to their overlapping nature, legal practitioners in the U.S. colloquially use to refer to any statement by a court the scope of which extends beyond the issue before the court. in this sense are not binding under the principle of , but tend to have a strong persuasive effect, by virtue of having been stated in an authoritative decision, or by an authoritative judge, or both. These subtypes include: * : A personal or individual dictum that is expressed by the judge who delivers an opinion but that is not necessarily concurred in by the whole court and that is not essential to the disposi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Charles Bowen, Baron Bowen
Charles Synge Christopher Bowen, Baron Bowen, (1 January 1835 – 10 April 1894) was an English judge. Early life Bowen was born at Woolaston in Gloucestershire – his father, the Rev. Christopher Bowen, originally of Hollymount, County Mayo, being then curate of the parish and his mother, Catherine Steele (1807/8–1902); his younger brother was Edward Ernest Bowen, a long-serving Harrow schoolmaster. He was educated at Lille in France, Blackheath and Rugby schools, leaving the latter in 1853 having won a scholarship to Balliol College, Oxford. There he made good his earlier academic promise, winning the principal classical scholarships and prizes of his time. He was elected a fellow of Balliol in 1857 while an undergraduate and became President of the Oxford Union in 1857. It was Bowen who, as President-Elect of the Oxford Union during the summer vacation of 1857, responded with enthusiasm to the plan of Dante Gabriel Rossetti and William Morris to paint the upper wa ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Scruttons Ltd V Midland Silicones Ltd
is a leading House of Lords case on privity of contract. It was a test case in which it was sought to establish a basis upon which stevedores could claim the protection of exceptions and limitations contained in a bill of lading contract to which they were not party. The Court outlined an exception to the privity rule, known as the Lord Reid test, through agency as it applies to sub-contractors and employees seeking protection in their employers' contract. Facts Scruttons Ltd was shipping a load of crates through a carrier. In the contract between the two parties there was a limitation of liability clause for $500 (£179) per box. The goods were damaged in transit due to the negligence of the stevedores. The stevedores were under contract with the shipping company which contained an exclusion clause. Midland were unaware of the relationship between the carriers and the stevedores. Judgment At first blush, it was clear to the Court that the stevedores could not be exempted by ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Privity Of Contract
The doctrine of privity of contract is a common law principle which provides that a contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations upon anyone who is not a party to that contract. It is related to, but distinct from, the doctrine of consideration, according to which a promise is legally enforceable only if valid consideration has been provided for it, and a plaintiff is legally entitled to enforce such a promise only if they are a promisee from whom the consideration has moved. A principal consequence of the doctrine of privity is that, at common law, a third party generally has no right to enforce a contract to which they are not a party, even where that contract was entered into by the contracting parties specifically for their benefit and with a common intention among all of them that they should be able to enforce it. In England & Wales and Northern Ireland, the doctrine has been substantially weakened by the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, which created a s ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
''Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company'is an English contract law decision by the Court of Appeal, which held an advertisement containing certain terms to get a reward constituted a binding unilateral offer that could be accepted by anyone who performed its terms. It is notable for its treatment of contract and of puffery in advertising, for its curious subject matter associated with medical quackery, and how the influential judges (particularly Lindley and Bowen) developed the law in inventive ways. ''Carlill'' is frequently discussed as an introductory contract case, often one of the first cases a law student studies in the law of contract. The case concerned a purported flu remedy called the "carbolic smoke ball". The manufacturer advertised that buyers who found it did not work would be awarded £100, a considerable amount of money at the time. The company was found to have been bound by its advertisement, which was construed as an offer which the buyer, by using the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Latin
Latin ( or ) is a classical language belonging to the Italic languages, Italic branch of the Indo-European languages. Latin was originally spoken by the Latins (Italic tribe), Latins in Latium (now known as Lazio), the lower Tiber area around Rome, Italy. Through the expansion of the Roman Republic, it became the dominant language in the Italian Peninsula and subsequently throughout the Roman Empire. It has greatly influenced many languages, Latin influence in English, including English, having contributed List of Latin words with English derivatives, many words to the English lexicon, particularly after the Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England, Christianization of the Anglo-Saxons and the Norman Conquest. Latin Root (linguistics), roots appear frequently in the technical vocabulary used by fields such as theology, List of Latin and Greek words commonly used in systematic names, the sciences, List of medical roots, suffixes and prefixes, medicine, and List of Latin legal terms ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of The United States
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all Federal tribunals in the United States, U.S. federal court cases, and over State court (United States), state court cases that turn on questions of Constitution of the United States, U.S. constitutional or Law of the United States, federal law. It also has Original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States, original jurisdiction over a narrow range of cases, specifically "all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party." In 1803, the Court asserted itself the power of Judicial review in the United States, judicial review, the ability to invalidate a statute for violating a provision of the Constitution via the landmark case ''Marbury v. Madison''. It is also able to strike down presidential directives for violating either the Constitution or s ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
