Court of Australia
380
Intermediate Appellate
Court
Appellate Court,
381
Court of Appeal,
382
Court of Criminal
Appeal,
383
Full Bench
384
Courts of First Instance
Supreme Court,
385
High Court of Justice,
386
Federal Court
387
Figure 13.1 Hierarchy of Courts
Stare Decisis
The doctrine of stare decisis is encapsulated in three propositions. These are
set out in broad terms in the following table:
Proposition 1: Courts Own Prior Decisions
Courts normally follow their own prior decisions, although they can depart from them for
good reason.
388
Proposition 2: Courts at Different Levels of the Hierarchy
Proposition 2.1. Courts must follow decisions of higher courts, that is, courts above them in
the hierarchy.
389
There can, however, easily be a dispute as to what is the correct ratio
decidendi of a case.
390
377
This is the final appellate court in the United States, India
378
This is the final appellate court in the United Kingdom.
379
This is the final appellate court in the United Kingdom for British colonies
and some former colonies.
380
This is the final appellate court in Australia.
381
This is the name of the appellate court in Illinois.
382
This label is used in many jurisdictions including the United Kingdom,
New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria.
383
Sometimes the Appellate Court or Court of Appeal handles criminal cases.
Where it does not do so, there may be a separate Court of Criminal Appeal.
384
In Australia, for example, it is common for an appellate court to be
constituted by a full bench of the court of first instance. Several judges, often three,
but it can be five and occasionally seven are selected to constitute the full bench
for the purpose of exercising jurisdiction of the court to hear appeals from itself.
Constituted this way, the court is said to sit in banco, that is, on a bench
(to
accommodate the several judges).
385
This is the name of the major courts of first instance including all of the
Australian states.
386
This is the name of the major court of first instance in the United Kingdom.
387
Australia and the United States, both
federations, have a federal court
which hears disputes involving laws passed by the central government in the
federation, the United States government and the Commonwealth (of Australia)
government.
388
See Blackshield (1978), Blackshield (1980), Prott (1978)
389
See Blackshield (1980). Lower courts, however, can be rebellious and not
do so – see Prott (1977).
 |
 |
 |