VCE Stuff > VCE Legal Studies

Ratio Decidendi

<< < (2/3) > >>

brendan:
in the case that you speak of i dun think that there are major questions of law answered.

being asked to actually write a ratio decidendi is very peculiar. it's hardly ever done in law school and really the crucial skill you need as a lawyer is to find the ratio to support whatever argument you happen to be making.

clinton_09:
first 10,000 word essay on human rights now making your own ratio decidendi, your legal teacher has some pretty interesting expectations

applekid:
i'm confused, the impression i'm getting in class is ratio decidendi and precedent is more related civil law? (we'll we've been doing in terms of civil cases anyway (ie. donaghue v stevenson/)). we've also been told the ratio decidendi is not always a clear extract in a judges comments and depending on the judge it can be difficult to even extract a ratio decidendi (even to the point where lawyers often refer to implied ratios?)

so strange how people at different schools do completely different things!

silentgoldeneyes:
From memory I was told precedent only exists in civil law (although it seems logical that judges can set precedents in sentencing in crim cases) because a crime can only be committed against an existing law.
However, precedent can be set on appeal (Studded Belt Case)

But we haven't had to write a ratio. Just extract it from quotes from cases.
It's an odd one...

costargh:
The sentence is not the precedent. Only the decision.

Eg. If it is found that their is a binding precedent in place, only the decision in that case will be binding, not the sentence (eg. 10 years jail).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page