Justice Jon Snow is a judge of the High Court of Australia. His Honour has heard both sides of the case before him and is about to make his decision. The lawyer for the plaintiff has cited a case from the Supreme Court of Victoria, with very similar facts to the present case, in which the plaintiff won the case.Which of the following statements about precedent is INCORRECT?Question 11Answera.The precedent cited by the plaintiff may have persuasive value, but does not have to be followed by Justice Snow.b.As the precedent cited by the plaintiff is materially similar to the case to be decided, Justice Snow is bound to decide the case in a manner which is consistent with the judgement of the Supreme Court of Victoria.c.As the Supreme Court of Victoria is below the High Court, Justice Snow is not bound to follow the decision.d.Once Justice Snow decides the case, this decision will become binding on all other courts in Australia.

A previous judgement cited by the court to decide on a similar set of facts:A.PrecedentB.CaseC.Obiter dictaD.Judicial dicta

According to the doctrine of precedent, which of the following is INCORRECT?Question 4Answera.Decisions of courts at the same level in a court hierarchy are not binding authority between them.b.A persuasive precedent set by a lower court does not have to be followed by a higher court.c.Precedents from the High Court of Australia are only binding on Federal courts.d.A decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal is binding on any other court in Victoria, and is persuasive in relation to any other court of the country.

Far from being rigid and inflexible, the doctrine of precedent enables judges to develop legal principles and respond to broader historical and institutional developments in and outside the legal system…… Discuss this statement.

In the imaginary case of Smith v R  the case involves stealing a car. When making a decision in the judgement how will the judge be guided by earlier cases in higher courts?Group of answer choicesEarlier cases will be sometimes binding depending on how similar the fact situation is between the cases.never binding because they are two different cases.of little value to later courts.always binding following the doctrine of precedent regardless of any differences between the cases

Which scenario describes a federal court applying the principle of precedent?A.A federal judge finds a criminal defendant not guilty because she believes his case should have been tried in a state court.B.A court rules that a state is allowed to racially segregate restrooms because earlier courts ruled in favor of segregated buses.C.A defendant convicted of a federal crime appeals to the Supreme Court, but his request is denied.D.A judge in a U.S. court of appeals overturns a defendant's conviction on the grounds that the law she violated is unconstitutional.SUBMITarrow_backPREVIOUS