Cases related to binding precedent.

This page is updated by Dr Peter Jepson

Donogue v Stevenson (1932).

James v Eastleigh Borough Council

Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council (1998).

Marleasing (EU Case).

R v R (1991) - marital rape.

Southwark London Borough Council v Mills (1999).

Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co (1944).

Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council (1998).

An old established rule of contract law that if the parties to an agreement based upon a mistake as to what the law was they are still bound by the contract: a mistake as to law was of no effect. However, if the parties made a mistake about the facts then in some circumstances the contract would not be binding. Although this distinction had seemed rather illogical, it was not until 1998 that the H of L decided, by a majority of 3-2, to abolish this rule about mistakes in law.

One effect of this is that it becomes retrospective - in that the Judges have simply clarified the law not introduced a new law.

Southwark London Borough Council v Mills (1999).

In this case, tenants of a block of flats claimed that the ordinary usage of surrounding flats amounted to a nuisance because of poor sound insulation. The House of Lords refused to extend the tort of nuisance, which is made up of common law rules, because they considered such an important decision would have major implications for councils all over the country (they may need to spend a fortune on sound insulation) the decision should rest with Parliament.

Lord Hoffman said:

'I think in a field such as housing law, which is very much a matter for the allocation of resources in accordance with democratically determined priorities, the development of the law should not go out of step with legislative policy.

Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co (1944).

In this case, the C of A laid down grounds on which it would not be bound by its past decisions. 

(1)      Where two previous decisions conflict ñ one would be overruled.  

(2)      Where a later decision of the H of L conflicted with C of A decision ñ then they would follow H of L. 

(3)      Where a decision had been made per incuriam (through want of care) ñ then they can correct.