Stare Decisis vs Ratio Decidendi: Key Differences Explained

2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 642

The only exception to this principle is resting on the principles of stare decisis and the per incuriam statute or decisis. As discussed earlier, even a wrong decision by a larger Bench or by a coequal Bench will not take away its binding precedent. ... decidendi”. ... The only thing in a Judge's decision binding a party is the principle upon which the case is decided and for this reason it is important to analyse a decisi....

Court of Appeal Putrajaya

In the circumstances, Her Ladyship decided that she was bound by the said decision based on the doctrine of stare decisis. ... The Doctrine Of Stare Decisis 1[21] In determining the issue at hand, it is instructive to make reference to the trite principle of stare decisis and its application. ... decisis. ... that the decision or judgment of a judge may fall into two ....

of stare decisis. ... The Arbitrator had further disregarded the doctrine of stare decisis. ... The common law tradition is built on the doctrine of stare decisis which directs a court to look to past decisions for guidance on how to decide a case [2012] 3 MLJ 149 at 172before it. ... The common law tradition is built on the doctrine of stare decisis....

2024 0 Supreme(MP) 65

In applying the doctrine of stare decisis, a distinction is made between a holding and a dictum. Generally stare decisis does not attach to such parts of an opinion of a court which are mere dicta. ... Mere passing remarks of a judge are known as 'obiter dicta', whilst considered enunciations of the Judge's opinion on a point not arising for decision, and so not part of the ratio decidendi#HL_EN....

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1779

In applying the doctrine of stare decisis, a distinction is made between a holding and a dictum. Generally stare decisis does not attach to such parts of an opinion of a court which are mere dicta. ... Mere passing remarks of a judge are known as 'obiter dicta', whilst considered enunciations of the Judge's opinion on a point not arising for decision, and so not part of the ratio decidendi#HL_EN....

Court of Appeal Putrajaya

This is because from the view point of the stare decisis doctrine, only the Ratio Decidendi ascertained from a written judgment of a superior Court, has binding or persuasive effect. ... If the Ratio Decidendi (Unilever) concerns the Main Issue (This Appeal), from the view point of the doctrine of stare decisis: (1) the subsequent Court of Appeal's dec....

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 24128

Hence, it has to be ascertained in relation to the ratio decidendi applied and settled. ... The only exception to this principle is resting on the principles of stare decisis and the per incuriam statute or decisis. As discussed earlier, even a wrong decision by a larger Bench or by a coequal Bench will not take away its binding precedent. ... decidendi”. ... Dhanwanti Devi [(1996) 6 SC....

Court of Appeal Putrajaya

[25] Initially, from the view point of the stare decisis doctrine, I had my doubts on whether a ratio decidendi can be extracted from Broad Grounds. ... Thus, in my view, the ratio decidendi of a case in respect of which only broad grounds were issued will still operate as binding precedent for the purposes of the principle of stare decisis as explain....

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 1657

There is nothing in the States Reorganisation Act 1956 or any other law which exalts the ratio of those decisions to the status of a binding law, nor could the ratio decidendi of those decisions be perpetuated by invoking the doctrine of stare decisis.” ... There is nothing in the States Re-organisation Act, 1956 or any other law which exalts the ratio of those decisions to the status of....

High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur

[2014] MSTC 30-078 , Rohana Yusuf J (now PCA) held as follows: Under the principle of stare decisis, it was held in the case of S Selvaraja T Singarathevar v. ... From the view point of the stare decisis doctrine, if there is no written judgment in a case, that case cannot be cited as a precedent. It is decided in Ketua Pengarah Pertubuhan Keseiamatan Sosial v.

2017 0 Supreme(J&K) 1098

What is observed by the Division Bench at two places (reproduced above) is actually a finding of fact recorded by the Division Bench which, if not assailed further successfully, would be binding on the parties. Otherwise also the expressions obiter dictum or obiter dicta, ratio decidendi and stare decisis are the expressions relatable to the precedential value of the judgment and, therefore, cannot be pressed into service to avoid findings of fact recorded therein.

2011 0 Supreme(AP) 909

Where, however, there is guidance and the legislation is challenged on the ground that the law with the definite guidance for which it provides has outstepped the limits of the Constitution by imposing a restraint which is either uncalled for or unreasonable in the circumstances, the scope and content of the enquiry is far removed from the tests of conformity to rational classification adopted for judging whether the law has contravened the requirement of equal protection under Art.14. In orde....

2009 0 Supreme(Bom) 684

It is the ratio understood in its correct perspective that is made applicable to a subsequent case on strength of a binding precedent. Generally known exceptions to the rule of precedent are principles of ratio decidendi, sub-silentio and stare decisis. It is an accepted precept of administration of justice to follow this rule of precedent. Ratio decidendi is thus the reason for deciding as reasoning is the soul of decision making process.

2007 0 Supreme(MP) 1078

Be it noted, the Division Bench looking to the principles of ratio decidendi, stare decisis, per incuriam and rule of subsilentio and the law of binding precedent framed the following question :- "What is the effect of the order of the Supreme Court passed in S.L.P. in the matter of Rama and Company (supra) on the status and effect of the decision of the Full Bench as discussed above and what should be the correct position under the law which should be followed by the Divisio....

2007 0 Supreme(Bom) 976

To the rule of precedents there are exceptions founding on the doctrine of ratio decidendi, sub-silentio and stare decisis. The precedents of the Courts are said to be the laws of the Courts and the Courts will not reverse a judgment contrary to many precedents" (Law Lexicon - 1997 Edition). An extra judicial opinion given out of Court or without context is not a good precedent. For a precedent to be binding, it cannot be without judicial discussion on arguments.