What role does the doctrine of precedent play in our legal system?

/in /by

What role does the doctrine of precedent play in our legal system? In applying this doctrine, do judges merely ‘find and apply the law, or do they ‘make’ the law? Give examples in your answer.

Question 2 (5 marks)

Briefly explain the literal approach and the purposive approach to statutory interpretation

 

Question 3 (10 marks)

 

You are a single judge of the Supreme Court of NSW called upon to decide the interpretation of a section of Commonwealth legislation. The previous decisions on the question are below. Consider each in turn and give reasons for which is binding or most highly persuasive.

Mulder v Weezes (1980) – NSWSC;

Andrews v Watson (2014) – VSC Court of Appeal – Followed Mulder v Weezes but not the reasoning in that case;

Williamson v Michaels (2010) – Qld SC. Followed Mulder v Weezes though “reluctantly”;

Cooper v Hodson (2000) – High Court. Followed Mulder v Weezes based on the facts of the appellant case, though in obiter approved the reasoning in Kennedy v Bryant;

Kennedy v Bryant (1985) – Full Court of the Federal Court. Declined to follow Mulder v Weezes, holding it to be “plainly wrong”;

Which decision would you ultimately follow and why? Would it be helpful to have any further information? If so what and why?

 

Question 4 (5 marks)

 

Explain the concept of terra nullius and explain why it was held to be a “legal fiction” in the landmark case of Mabo No. 2.

 

 

 

Question 5 (10 marks)

 

You are a single judge of the Supreme Court of NSW considering a matter of common law. The previous decisions on the question are below. Consider each in turn and give reasons for which is binding or most highly persuasive.

 

Heather v Forrest (1930) – Court of Appeal England

 

Littles v Downer (2020) – Victorian Court of Appeal. Followed Baboa v Erics, stating it correctly stated the law.

 

Symonds v Lennard (1991) – House of Lords

 

Roberts v Ashton (1980) – Victorian Court of Appeal

 

Matthews v Coopers (2022) – High Court of Australia which held that the reasoning in Symonds v Lennard was correct, but distinguished that case on its facts and followed Baboa v Erics.

 

Baboa v Erics (2019) – Supreme Court of Canada

 

Which decision would you ultimately follow and why? Would it be helpful to have any further information? If so what and why?