Explain the concept of precedent, making specific reference to the Essay

Explain the concept of source, making specific reference to the doctrine of promissory estoppel as developed in the case of C - Essay ExampleThe achieved stability allows for predictability in law in addition to offering some degree of idiosyncratic rights security. Precedent also ensure that the law only develops with regards to the changing view-points of communities, thereby, reflecting, more accurately, the expectations and morals of the community. The concept of precedent makes a system adaptable to changing and variable circumstances rational, highly practical, and puts into consideration various human experiences2. The doctrine of precedent also referred to stare decisis, is not only the most important aspect of putting surface Law, but is indeed a distinctive feature of the said tradition. It is true that, for dynamism and coherence, Common Law depends on precedent for the preservation of its tradition. Therefore, what is this concept of precedent, which is so much a key part of Common Law? Precedent is an expression-shorthand-of stare decisis, which means to subscribe by the decisions3. In practice and theory, the concept of precedent implies that courts of lower cadre must follow or ensure their decisions are in tandem with those of courts of higher cadre in questions of law, and that, those higher courts should, by themselves, incite from decisions that they had prior made on questions of law, only in the event that there are important reasons for them to do so4. In simpler terms, the concept of precedent requires that court stand by their decisions in questions of law that are similar. The principles of precedent apply to decisions interpreting positive law as much as it applies to customary laws5. It should be noteworthy that, in the event that lower courts fail to follow precedent of a higher court in its decision, chances are, such decisions nooky be reversed in appeal. In the case of Central London Property Trust Ltd V. High Trees firm Ltd 1947 Kb 130, 1947, in which Central London had sued High Trees House for full payment of rent despite their previous agreement in 1940, where High Trees House was to pay rent reduced by half6, is a double-dyed(a) example of how the concept of precedence has been utilized in making decisions of questions in law. Judge, Lord Denning, J., in his ruling or judgment, that the full rent was payable from mid-1945 when the categorical was fully occupied, followed past precedent from previous decisions such as that in the case of Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co7. According to the principles of precedent, a court can only depart from past precedent only with strong justification. Deviation from precedent is permissible in the event that earlier decision has obvious misunderstanding or the principle of law that the precedent established is not reasonable or in the event that there are changes in law that make up the reasoning behind the earlier decision weak8. This is evident in Judge , Lord Denning, J., judgment, which in his continued obiter statement he claims that Central London would not arrest been able to receive full rent if they had tried to claim it from 1940 onwards. This statement was not in binding with precedent however, it led to the creation of the doctrine of promissory estoppel. The judge reasoned that, in the event that a person lead another person to believe that he/she will not enforce exacting legal rights, the courts are obliged to prevent them, at a later stage, from doing so9. Courts have the obligation of distinguishing its case from precedent already established in the scenario where the facts in the current case