Many legal systems throughout the world have a rule of thumb adherence to the doctrine of precedent. However, few keep to the concept of binding precedent as rigidly as the English legal system. Indeed, it has been said that it is more difficult to get rid of an awkward decision in England than it is anywhere else in the world. 4.2 LEARNING OUTCOMES By the end of this chapter, readers should: • understand the basic rationale for the doctrine of precedent; • be able to explain what the doctrine of precedent is; • understand the difference between the theoretical dimension and the practical dimension of the doctrine of precedent; • be able to competently read a case and prepare a case note; • understand the relationship between reliable law reporting and the doctrine of precedent; • understand the relationship between statutes and cases; • be able to distinguish between year books, nominate reports, general and specialist series, and official reports; • understand the constituent parts of the ratio of a case. 4.3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW REPORTING AND THE DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT The only way of being able to keep successfully to the doctrine of binding precedent is to have a reliable system of law reporting. The competent production of volumes of reports of past cases is indispensable to the operation of the doctrine. Reliable law reports have only been available in England since 1865 although there are a range of fragmentary law reports going back to the 12th century, which are known as yearbooks. Reports existing in the Yearbooks cover the period from the late 12th century to the early 16th century. However, it is not always possible to discover if the report is of an actual case or a moot (an argument contest between lawyers). This makes them an unreliable source and also the detail that was given and the quality of the reports varies considerably. Some reports record outcome, but not facts, others record facts and outcome, but give no reasoning process. Reports also exist in the nominate (named) reports dating from the late 15th century to 1865. By the 19th century, a court-authorised reporter was attached to all higher courts and their reports were published in collected volumes again by name of reporter. By 1865, there were 16 reporters compiling and publishing authorised reports. They were amalgamated into the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting and the reports were published in volumes known as the Law Reports. These reports are checked by the judges of the relevant case prior to publication and a rule of citation has developed that if a case is reported in a range of publications, only that version printed in the Law Reports is cited in court. However, the accuracy of reports pre-dating the setting up of the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting in 1865 cannot be guaranteed.

DOI link for Many legal systems throughout the world have a rule of thumb adherence to the doctrine of precedent. However, few keep to the concept of binding precedent as rigidly as the English legal system. Indeed, it has been said that it is more difficult to get rid of an awkward decision in England than it is anywhere else in the world. 4.2 LEARNING OUTCOMES By the end of this chapter, readers should: • understand the basic rationale for the doctrine of precedent; • be able to explain what the doctrine of precedent is; • understand the difference between the theoretical dimension and the practical dimension of the doctrine of precedent; • be able to competently read a case and prepare a case note; • understand the relationship between reliable law reporting and the doctrine of precedent; • understand the relationship between statutes and cases; • be able to distinguish between year books, nominate reports, general and specialist series, and official reports; • understand the constituent parts of the ratio of a case. 4.3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW REPORTING AND THE DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT The only way of being able to keep successfully to the doctrine of binding precedent is to have a reliable system of law reporting. The competent production of volumes of reports of past cases is indispensable to the operation of the doctrine. Reliable law reports have only been available in England since 1865 although there are a range of fragmentary law reports going back to the 12th century, which are known as yearbooks. Reports existing in the Yearbooks cover the period from the late 12th century to the early 16th century. However, it is not always possible to discover if the report is of an actual case or a moot (an argument contest between lawyers). This makes them an unreliable source and also the detail that was given and the quality of the reports varies considerably. Some reports record outcome, but not facts, others record facts and outcome, but give no reasoning process. Reports also exist in the nominate (named) reports dating from the late 15th century to 1865. By the 19th century, a court-authorised reporter was attached to all higher courts and their reports were published in collected volumes again by name of reporter. By 1865, there were 16 reporters compiling and publishing authorised reports. They were amalgamated into the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting and the reports were published in volumes known as the Law Reports. These reports are checked by the judges of the relevant case prior to publication and a rule of citation has developed that if a case is reported in a range of publications, only that version printed in the Law Reports is cited in court. However, the accuracy of reports pre-dating the setting up of the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting in 1865 cannot be guaranteed.

Many legal systems throughout the world have a rule of thumb adherence to the doctrine of precedent. However, few keep to the concept of binding precedent as rigidly as the English legal system. Indeed, it has been said that it is more difficult to get rid of an awkward decision in England than it is anywhere else in the world. 4.2 LEARNING OUTCOMES By the end of this chapter, readers should: • understand the basic rationale for the doctrine of precedent; • be able to explain what the doctrine of precedent is; • understand the difference between the theoretical dimension and the practical dimension of the doctrine of precedent; • be able to competently read a case and prepare a case note; • understand the relationship between reliable law reporting and the doctrine of precedent; • understand the relationship between statutes and cases; • be able to distinguish between year books, nominate reports, general and specialist series, and official reports; • understand the constituent parts of the ratio of a case. 4.3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW REPORTING AND THE DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT The only way of being able to keep successfully to the doctrine of binding precedent is to have a reliable system of law reporting. The competent production of volumes of reports of past cases is indispensable to the operation of the doctrine. Reliable law reports have only been available in England since 1865 although there are a range of fragmentary law reports going back to the 12th century, which are known as yearbooks. Reports existing in the Yearbooks cover the period from the late 12th century to the early 16th century. However, it is not always possible to discover if the report is of an actual case or a moot (an argument contest between lawyers). This makes them an unreliable source and also the detail that was given and the quality of the reports varies considerably. Some reports record outcome, but not facts, others record facts and outcome, but give no reasoning process. Reports also exist in the nominate (named) reports dating from the late 15th century to 1865. By the 19th century, a court-authorised reporter was attached to all higher courts and their reports were published in collected volumes again by name of reporter. By 1865, there were 16 reporters compiling and publishing authorised reports. They were amalgamated into the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting and the reports were published in volumes known as the Law Reports. These reports are checked by the judges of the relevant case prior to publication and a rule of citation has developed that if a case is reported in a range of publications, only that version printed in the Law Reports is cited in court. However, the accuracy of reports pre-dating the setting up of the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting in 1865 cannot be guaranteed.