下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
Stare decisis (Anglo-Latin pronunciation: /'st ɛə ri ː d ᵻˈ saɪs ᵻ s/) is a legal principle by which judges are obligated to respect the precedent established by prior decisions. The words originate from the phrasing of the principle in the Latin maxim “Stare decisis et non quieta movere”: to stand by decisions and not disturb the undisturbed. In a legal context, this is understood to mean that courts should generally abide by precedent and not disturb settled matters. The principle of stare decisis can be divided into two components:
The first is the rule that a decision made by a superior court, or by the same court in an earlier decision, is binding precedent that the court itself and all its inferior courts are obligated to follow; the second is the principle that a court should not overturn its own precedent unless there is a strong reason to do so and should be guided by principles from lateral and inferior courts. The second principle, regarding persuasive precedent, is an advisory one that courts can and do ignore occasionally.
Stare decisis is a legal principle of case law in common law systems. In the common law tradition, courts decide the law applicable to a case by interpreting statutes and applying precedent which record how and why prior cases have been decided. Unlike most civil law systems, common law systems follow the doctrine of stare decisis, by which most courts are bound by their own previous decisions in similar cases, and all lower courts should make decisions consistent with previous decisions of higher courts. For example, in England, the High Court and the Court of Appeal are each bound by their own previous decisions, but the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is able to deviate from its earlier decisions, although in practice it rarely does so.
Generally speaking, higher courts do not have direct oversight over day-to-day proceedings in lower courts, in that they cannot reach out on their own initiative at any time to reverse or overrule judgments of the lower courts. Normally, the burden rests with litigants to appeal rulings (including those in clear violation of established case law) to the higher courts. If a judge acts against precedent and the case is not appealed, the decision will stand.
A lower court may not rule against a binding precedent, even if the lower court feels that the precedent is unjust; the lower court may only express the hope that a higher court or the legislature will reform the rule in question. If the court believes that developments or trends in legal reasoning render the precedent unhelpful, and wishes to evade it and help the law evolve, the court may either hold that the precedent is inconsistent with subsequent authority, or that the precedent should be distinguished by some material difference between the facts of the cases. If that judgment goes to appeal, the appellate court will have the opportunity to review both the precedent and the case under appeal, perhaps overruling the previous case law by setting a new precedent of higher authority. This may happen several times as the case works its way through successive appeals.
Any court may seek to distinguish its present case from that of a binding precedent, in order to reach a different conclusion. The validity of such a distinction may or may not be accepted on appeal. An appellate court may also propound an entirely new and different analysis from that of junior courts, and may or may not be bound by its own previous decisions, or in any case may distinguish the decisions based on significant differences in the facts applicable to each case. Or, a court may view the matter before it as one of “first impression,” not governed by any controlling precedent.
precedent [ˈpresɪdənt] n. 前例; 先例
adj. 在前的，在先的
maxim [ˈmæksɪm] n. 格言，座右铭; 准则
proceeding [prəˈsi:dɪŋ] n. 进行，进程; 行动; 诉讼; 会议记录
v. 进行( proceed的现在分词); 前进; （沿特定路线）行进; （尤指打断后）继续说
appeal [əˈpi:l] n. 上诉; [体育]诉请; 呼吁; （迫切的）要求（帮助、同情等）恳求
legislature [ˈledʒɪsleɪtʃə(r)] n. 立法机关; 立法机构; 立法部; （特指）州议会
vi. （迫切）要求; 有吸引力; 求助（于）; 提请注意
vt. 将……移交上级法院审理
successive [səkˈsesɪv] adj. 连续的，相继的; 继承的，接替的; 逐次
appellate [ə'pelɪt] adj. （尤指法庭）上诉的，受理上诉的
propound [prəˈpaʊnd] vt. 提出（问题、计划等）供考虑（讨论），提议
1. Stare decisis means ______.
A. all necessary changes having been made
B. to stand by that which is decided
C. by the court (said of a decision not identifying the judge who wrote it)
D. not with standing the verdict
2. Which of the following is NOT true?
A. Stare decisis is a Latin term meaning “to stand by that which is decided.”
B. A lower court may not rule against a binding precedent.
C. Stare decisis has never been overruled by courts in some cases.
D. Stare decisis is a doctrine or policy of following rules or principles laid down in previous judicial decisions.
3. Stare decisis is a legal principle ______.
A. in America
B. in Japan
C. in China
D. in Germany
essence / identical / Latin / disregard / trial
future / hear / decision / prior / appellate
Stare decisis is a 1 term meaning “to stand by that which is decided.” It is a legal principle which dictates that courts cannot 2 the standard. The court must uphold 3 decisions. In 4 , this legal principle dictates that once a law has been determined by the 5 court (which 6 and determines appeals from the 7 of the 8 courts) to be relevant to the facts of the case, 9 cases will follow the same principle of law if they involve considerably 10 facts.