학술논문
영미법상의 선례구속의 원칙
이용수 125
- 영문명
- The doctrine of Precedent in anglo american law
- 발행기관
- 원광대학교 법학연구소
- 저자명
- 피정현(Pee, Jung-Hyun)
- 간행물 정보
- 『원광법학』제24권 제1호, 9~36쪽, 전체 27쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2008.03.30
6,040원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
The most of outstanding characteristic of anglo american law is that it is largely judge made. That is, the bulk of common law and equity has not been enacted by Parliament, but has been developed through the centuries by the judges applying established or customary rules of law to new situations and cases. The principle behind the doctrine of Precedent is that in each case the judges apply existing principles of law. that is, they follow the example or precedent of earlier decisions.
The doctrine of precedent began to develop in the royal courts after the reign of Henry II, and in the equity courts rather later. But it did not become firmly established until the eighteenth century, though it had been widely adhered to before then. It did not take its modern form, however, until a hierarchy of courts was established by the Judicature Acts 1873-1875.
The general rules governing the standing of judicial decisions is that a decision made by a higher court must be followed by a lower court. Thus; The House of Lords(H.L.) binds all lower courts. Until 1966, H.L. was bound by its own previous decisions. The Court of Appeal(C.A.) is bound by H.L. It also binds itself(since 1944) subject to the following exceptions; ① the C.A.may choose either of two previous decisions which conflicts with one another. ② the C.A. must follow a H.L. decision, where that conflicts with its previous decision. ③ the C.A. may decline to follow a previous C.A. decision if that was made per incuriam. The High Court is bound by the H.L. and C.A., as well as by decisions of its own divisional courts. High court decisions bind inferior courts.
When a judge delivers his judgment, he will normally begin by giving a resume of the facts of the case, and then go on to give his decision and the reason for his decision(ratio decidendi). It is ratio decidendi of a judgment, which creates a precedent for the future. Any general comments on law made by the way(obiter dicta) in the course of a judgment, are disregarded in considering what part of the judgment, constitutes the precedent.
If it would lead to injustice in the particular case before him, a judge may refuse to apply an earlier precedent. If the precedent is one laid down by an inferior court he overrule it. But if it was laid down by a superior court he will have to evade the precedent by distinguishing between the case he is deciding and the one in which the precedent was laid down.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제의 소재
Ⅱ. 선례구속의 원칙의 연혁
Ⅲ. 先例拘束의 原則의 內容
Ⅳ. 선례구속의 원칙에 대한 예외
Ⅴ. 결 어
참고문헌
Abstract
참고자료
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 미국법상 은행이사의 신인의무(fiduciary duty)에 관한 연구
- 대기발령에 관한 법적 고찰
- 북한 협동농장 소유제도의 전환문제
- 부동산 공시제도 일원화 방안
- 영미법상의 선례구속의 원칙
- 공영방송의 프로그램의 자유
- 공동불법행위 책임분배의 적정화에 관한 연구
- 상법 제719조에서 “사고”의 개념에 대한 고찰
- 법학전문대학원에서의 임상법학교육방법론
- 계약상 이행청구권과 과실상계
- 산업안전보건위원회의 구성과 운영에 관한 연구
- 등기의 추정력
- 칼리클레스 자연법사상의 재해석
- 우리나라 국민참여재판제도에 대한 평가
- 교회분열시 재산귀속과 형사책임의 범위
- 중국 저작권법의 내용과 판례
참고문헌
관련논문
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!