ANGLAIS JURIDIQUE .

Hala Walid . licence 1 . Group A .

“Iin practice does the court presidence influence the juge’s opinion to the extend
that makes the defacto binding ?

we simply need to break down our question intro small parts that needs to be
defined ; starting of with the court presidence which refers to a court decision
that is considered as authority for deciding subsequent cases involving
identical or similar facts, or similar legal issues in fact a court presidence’s
responsible for the arrangement of the work of the Court and presides
whenever he is sitting in the Court. In arranging the work of the Court he is
assisted by a Registrar.

Furthermore the de facto term indicates that An action taken without strict
legal authority to do so, but recognized as legally valid nonetheless. Moreover
De facto means a state of affairs that is true in fact, but that is not officially
sanctioned. In contrast, de jure means a state of affairs that is in accordance
with law (i.e. that is officially sanctioned).

We find two types of law ( common and civil ) so we can also determine that
in civil law The court precedent is a legal principle that has been established
by a superior court should be followed in other similar cases by that court and
other courts meanwhile in common law judges decide cases along the lines
of earlier decisions made in similar cases (‘precedents’). Judges are also
required to interpret legislation if there is a dispute about the meaning or how
to apply an Act in a case. These interpretations then become part of the
common law.

Courts may reason using precedents in various ways, but not all of them
satisfy the rule of law . In fact , courts always have a reason to decide
precedent-governed disputes by following precedent. which is a minimum
requirement of the rule of law.

For instance ; in the USA who follows the common law, the supreme court is
the highest court and its decisions are binding on the other lower courts , to
reiterate the lower courts are forced to follow to the supreme court according
to the rule of hierarchy of the courts.

Such as the doctrine of precedent in the English legal system. Within the
hierarchy of English courts structure, it is a general idea that in some cases
are bound to follow previous decisions while some cases are not.

On the contrary ; it not the same case in France , which is different from the
civil law that’s codified .

Binding precedent relies on the legal principle of stare decisis. Stare decisis
means to stand by things decided. It ensures certainty and consistency in the
application of law so we can establish that in Civil law and pluralist systems
precedent is not binding but case law is taken into account by the courts.