Precedent in English Law for SQE1

The Legal System > Precedent in English Law

Judicial precedent is one of the most frequently tested concepts in the SQE1 Legal System module. You need to know how binding authority works, the difference between ratio and obiter, and when a court can depart from previous decisions.

What Is Precedent in English Law?

Many SQE1 candidates confuse binding ratio decidendi with non-binding obiter dicta, or forget the Young v Bristol Aeroplane exceptions that allow the Court of Appeal to depart from its own decisions—mistakes that cost marks in scenario-based questions. Precedent—also known as stare decisis ('to stand by things decided')—is the principle that courts should follow decisions made in earlier cases where the material facts are sufficiently similar. It promotes consistency, certainty, and fairness across the legal system.

The doctrine depends on the court hierarchy: decisions of higher courts bind lower courts. The binding part of a judgment is the ratio decidendi (the legal reasoning essential to the decision). Obiter dicta (remarks made 'by the way') are persuasive but not binding. This principle is central to understanding the legal system as a whole.

Key Principles for SQE1

Ratio decidendi: the legal principle that forms the basis of the decision and is binding on lower courts.
Obiter dicta: statements in a judgment that are not essential to the decision; persuasive only.
The Supreme Court can depart from its own previous decisions under the Practice Statement [1966].
The Court of Appeal is generally bound by its own previous decisions, subject to the Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co [1944] exceptions: where there are conflicting Court of Appeal decisions, where a Supreme Court decision impliedly overrules, or where the decision was given per incuriam (in ignorance of relevant authority).
Distinguishing: a court avoids following a precedent by identifying material factual differences between the current case and the earlier authority.
Overruling: a higher court declares that the legal rule in an earlier decision is wrong; the earlier case no longer represents good law.
Reversing: a higher court overturns the decision of a lower court in the same case on appeal.

How This Appears in SQE1 Questions

Examiners test this distinction repeatedly, with scenario-based questions designed to trap candidates who confuse binding and persuasive authority. Questions commonly test whether you can identify the ratio of a case, determine which courts are bound by which, and recognise when the Court of Appeal can depart from its own decisions. Another common MCQ pattern asks you to evaluate whether obiter dicta from the Supreme Court are binding on a lower court—they are not, but they carry very strong persuasive weight.

Quick Example Scenario

The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) is hearing a case involving negligence. Counsel argues that the court should follow a 2015 Court of Appeal decision. However, a 2020 Supreme Court decision, although not directly on the same point, contains obiter dicta suggesting a different approach. Must the Court of Appeal follow its own 2015 decision?

The Court of Appeal is generally bound by its own previous decisions under Young v Bristol Aeroplane. However, if the 2020 Supreme Court decision impliedly overrules the 2015 Court of Appeal authority, the Court of Appeal may depart from it. The obiter dicta from the Supreme Court are not binding but are highly persuasive.

Common Mistakes Students Make

Confusing ratio decidendi with obiter dicta—remember, only the ratio is binding.
Mixing up overruling (different case, higher court corrects the law) with reversing (same case on appeal).
Forgetting the Bristol Aeroplane exceptions and stating that the Court of Appeal can never depart from its own decisions.
Treating obiter dicta from the Supreme Court as binding rather than persuasive.

Quick Summary

Ratio decidendi: the legal principle/reasoning essential to the court's decision; it is binding on lower courts
Obiter dicta: remarks made 'by the way' in a judgment that are not essential to the decision; persuasive only, even from the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court can depart from its own previous decisions under the Practice Statement 1966
The Court of Appeal is generally bound by its own previous decisions but has three exceptions under Young v Bristol Aeroplane: conflicting CoA decisions, Supreme Court has impliedly overruled, or decision was per incuriam (in ignorance of relevant authority)
Distinguishing: a court avoids following a precedent by identifying material factual differences between the current case and the earlier authority
Overruling: a higher court declares that the legal rule in an earlier decision is wrong (different cases); reversing: higher court overturns a lower court's decision in the same case on appeal
Lower courts are bound by the ratio of higher courts but not by obiter dicta

Exam tip

A frequent trap is confusing 'overruling' with 'reversing'—they sound similar but operate very differently. Overruling affects different cases; reversing affects the same case on appeal.

Want to test this now? Try a few SQE1-style questions below before moving on.

Test Yourself

Practise Precedent In English Law Questions for SQE1

Want to solidify your knowledge? ActusPrep provides realistic SQE1 questions tailored to this topic.

👉 Try our free demo: https://actusprep.com/demo 👉 View plans and pricing: https://actusprep.com/pricing