CASE-LAW TECHNIQUE

It is to the effect that like cases must be treated alike. It

constitutes the cornerstone of English Law and is adhered to in
Mauritius since the 1850s .
Every decision of the Court contains 3
basic ingredients:
1. Findings of material facts
2. Statements of principles of law relevant to the
legal problems disclosed by the facts
3. Judgment based on applying the law to the
facts
Ratio Decidendi
The Ratio Decidendi of a case is the rule of law
upon which the decision is founded, i.e. the
reasons for deciding the case.
The Ratio Decidendi of a case can be defined as
the (legally) material facts of the case plus the
decision thereon.
The Ratio Decidendi of a case is binding and
must be followed in future cases, i.e. it binds
future Judges.
Orbiter Dicta
It is something said by the Judge about the law
while delivering his opinion, which is not part of
the course of reasoning leading to the decision of
some question or issue presented to him.
A later Court may respect such statements, but is
not bound to follow them; they are only of
persuasive value.
How to determine the Ratio Decidendi
of a case?
It is not always easy to identify the Ratio
It may either mean the Descriptive Ratio
Decidendi or the Prescriptive Ratio Decidendi
The Descriptive Ratio is the rule that the
Judge who decided the case intended to lay
down and apply to the facts
The Prescriptive Ratio is the rule that a latter
Court concedes him to have the power to lay
down
How to determine the Ratio Decidendi
of a case?
The Ratio depends upon a process of abstraction
from the totality of the facts that occurred in it
by using common sense and ones feeling what
the Law ought to be
The process is basically one of choosing an
appropriate level of generality
The Ratio Decidendi can be framed too widely or
too narrowly
The higher the abstraction, the wider the Ratio
How to determine the Ratio Decidendi
of a case?
In a Court of Appeal decision, where each Judge
may deliver his opinion, the Ratio Decidendi is
ascertained by adding up the facts regarded as
material by any group of Judges whose opinions
constitute the majority, and to base the Ratio
Decidendi on those facts
Illustration
Case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
FACTS
May Donoghue, a Scots widow, ordered an ice-cream drink. The owner of
the caf where she was, brought the order and poured part of an opaque
bottle of ginger beer into a tumbler containing ice cream. Mrs Donoghue
drank some of the contents and when she lifted the bottle to pour the
remainder of the ginger beer into the tumbler, a dead snail, in a state of
decomposition, plopped out of the bottle into the tumbler. Mrs Donoghue
later complained of stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having
gastroenteritis. She also claimed to have suffered emotional distress as a
result of the incident.
She brought an action against David Stevenson, an aerated water
manufacturer in Paisley, in which she claimed 500 as damages for injuries
sustained by her through drinking ginger beer which had been
manufactured by the defendant.
Case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
The range of facts could be stated at alternative
levels of generality
Fact as to the agent of the harm
Dead snails
Any snails
Any noxious physical foreign body
Any noxious foreign element, physical or not
Any noxious element
Case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
Fact as to the vehicle of the harm
An opaque bottle of ginger beer
An opaque bottle of beverage
Any bottle of beverage
Any container of goods for human use
Any good whatsoever
Case of Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
Fact as to the Plaintiffs identity
A Scots widow
A Scots woman
A woman
Any adult
Any human being
Any legal person
A Judge may find himself in a position where, in
spite of a precedent, he decides that the latter is
not applicable to the case he is trying
There are then several courses of action open to
him
Distinguishing Cases
A Judge must follow a precedent unless he can
reasonably distinguish it
Changed Conditions
Cessante ratione cessat ipsa lex
i.e. a case ceases to be law owing to changed
conditions
In R v Jackson it was considered that the
husbands power to confine and chastise his wife
never represented the common law
When the nature of things change, the rule of
law must change too
Overulling / Reversing
Overulling implies disapproval with the ratio
in a previous case, either that the previous Court
did not correctly interpret the law or because the
latter Court considers the Rule of Law contained
in the previous ratio to be no longer desirable
Reversing is the overturning of a decision on
appeal in the same case. It involves disapproval
of the ratio as decided by the lower Court
Per Incuriam Statements
A decision is reached Per Incuriamwhen it is
arrived at through ignorance of the law or
through failure to refer to an earlier decision or
relevant statutory provision