By the same authors

From the same journal

From the same journal

Doublethink and District Judges: High Court precedent in the County Court

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Doublethink and District Judges : High Court precedent in the County Court. / Morgan, Phillip David James.

In: Legal Studies, Vol. 32, No. 3, 09.2012, p. 421-447.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Morgan, PDJ 2012, 'Doublethink and District Judges: High Court precedent in the County Court', Legal Studies, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 421-447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00228.x

APA

Morgan, P. D. J. (2012). Doublethink and District Judges: High Court precedent in the County Court. Legal Studies, 32(3), 421-447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00228.x

Vancouver

Morgan PDJ. Doublethink and District Judges: High Court precedent in the County Court. Legal Studies. 2012 Sep;32(3):421-447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00228.x

Author

Morgan, Phillip David James. / Doublethink and District Judges : High Court precedent in the County Court. In: Legal Studies. 2012 ; Vol. 32, No. 3. pp. 421-447.

Bibtex - Download

@article{ba43d217699e41a4bdbca349166f00ea,
title = "Doublethink and District Judges: High Court precedent in the County Court",
abstract = "This paper considers an often ignored topic in the English system of precedent, the role of High Court precedent in the county court. In doing so it reveals the many weaknesses of the existing approach to lower court precedent. It is argued that the High Court, (generally) a first instance tribunal, which does not bind itself and can come to contradictory decisions in different cases, the later not overruling the earlier, should not bind any court below it. A model of how multi-tiered first instance tribunals, such as the High Court and county court, should interact is demonstrated by the approach taken between the Court of Session, Outer House, and inferior courts in Scotland.",
keywords = "Precedent",
author = "Morgan, {Phillip David James}",
year = "2012",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00228.x",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "421--447",
journal = "Legal Studies",
issn = "0261-3875",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Doublethink and District Judges

T2 - High Court precedent in the County Court

AU - Morgan, Phillip David James

PY - 2012/9

Y1 - 2012/9

N2 - This paper considers an often ignored topic in the English system of precedent, the role of High Court precedent in the county court. In doing so it reveals the many weaknesses of the existing approach to lower court precedent. It is argued that the High Court, (generally) a first instance tribunal, which does not bind itself and can come to contradictory decisions in different cases, the later not overruling the earlier, should not bind any court below it. A model of how multi-tiered first instance tribunals, such as the High Court and county court, should interact is demonstrated by the approach taken between the Court of Session, Outer House, and inferior courts in Scotland.

AB - This paper considers an often ignored topic in the English system of precedent, the role of High Court precedent in the county court. In doing so it reveals the many weaknesses of the existing approach to lower court precedent. It is argued that the High Court, (generally) a first instance tribunal, which does not bind itself and can come to contradictory decisions in different cases, the later not overruling the earlier, should not bind any court below it. A model of how multi-tiered first instance tribunals, such as the High Court and county court, should interact is demonstrated by the approach taken between the Court of Session, Outer House, and inferior courts in Scotland.

KW - Precedent

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84865397284&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00228.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1748-121X.2012.00228.x

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 421

EP - 447

JO - Legal Studies

JF - Legal Studies

SN - 0261-3875

IS - 3

ER -