This book is aimed at analysing how court decisions (precedent) function as a source of law by drawing on the comparison between jurisdictions from all over the world, from different legal families and with diverse legal traditions, including Brazil, China, England & Wales, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, South Africa and Sweden.
The contributions cover various aspects such as:
-The history of precedent;
-Formal support for precedent as a source of law;
-The binding nature of precedent;
-Reporting systems and style of reasoning;
-Judges as law-makers.
The contributions to this book highlight the differences between the jurisdictions on a formal level and points to how precedent is considered a source of law. Addressing the mystery that surrounds precedents, the book explores where there is a significant gap between what is said and what is actually done in various jurisdictions
