Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

    S Nagraj Case (Shah J)

    Uploaded by

    Animesh Kumar
    The document discusses the doctrine of stare decisis and a court's ability to rectify its own orders to avoid miscarriages of justice. While courts generally adhere to precedent under stare decisis, it is not applied as rigidly in administrative law as in public law. Precedent can be departed from when necessary to ensure justice is served and orders are not prejudicial, as the goals of avoiding abuse of process and achieving justice sometimes require courts to have flexibility to correct their own orders.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    S Nagraj Case (Shah J)

    Uploaded by

    Animesh Kumar
    12 views1 page
    The document discusses the doctrine of stare decisis and a court's ability to rectify its own orders to avoid miscarriages of justice. While courts generally adhere to precedent under stare decisis, it is not applied as rigidly in administrative law as in public law. Precedent can be departed from when necessary to ensure justice is served and orders are not prejudicial, as the goals of avoiding abuse of process and achieving justice sometimes require courts to have flexibility to correct their own orders.

    Original Description:

    curative petition

    Original Title

    Curative Petition 1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses the doctrine of stare decisis and a court's ability to rectify its own orders to avoid miscarriages of justice. While courts generally adhere to precedent under stare decisis, it is not applied as rigidly in administrative law as in public law. Precedent can be departed from when necessary to ensure justice is served and orders are not prejudicial, as the goals of avoiding abuse of process and achieving justice sometimes require courts to have flexibility to correct their own orders.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    12 views1 page

    S Nagraj Case (Shah J)

    Uploaded by

    Animesh Kumar
    The document discusses the doctrine of stare decisis and a court's ability to rectify its own orders to avoid miscarriages of justice. While courts generally adhere to precedent under stare decisis, it is not applied as rigidly in administrative law as in public law. Precedent can be departed from when necessary to ensure justice is served and orders are not prejudicial, as the goals of avoiding abuse of process and achieving justice sometimes require courts to have flexibility to correct their own orders.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    S Nagraj case (Shah J)

    Justice is a virtue which transcends all barriers. Neither the rules of procedure nor technicalities
    of law can stand in its way. The order of the Court should not be prejudicial to anyone.

    Doctrine of stare decisis is adhered for consistency but it is not as inflexible in Administrative
    Law as in Public Law. Even the law bends before justice.

    Even when there was no statutory provision and no rules were framed by the highest court
    indicating the circumstances in which it could rectify its order the courts culled out such power
    to avoid abuse of process or miscarriage of justice

    Lord Gardiner, L.C. in Lloyds Bank, Ltd. Vs. Dawson and Ors.

    Previous decisions of the Court are normally binding. However, they can be departed from when
    it is right to do so.

    You might also like