Contract Law

Running head: CONTRACT LAW
Contract Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CONTRACT LAW
Section One
1. a.
Public Law is defined as the law that deals with the relationship between the
government and the individual entities like people, companies, organizations, et cetera. It also
deal with the relations that binds individuals directly with the society. Public law governs
unequal relationships as one is always superior to the other (Loughlin 1992). The government
has the power to decide the rights of the individuals, even though it is directed to follow the
doctrine of rule of law while making laws for individuals and other legal entities. However,
the government cannot make laws that jeopardises the fundamental and basic human rights of
the individuals. Public law includes Constitutional law, Criminal law, law of taxation,
administrative law, and procedural law.
On the other hand, Private law is defined as the law that deals with the relationship
between individuals. It is a part of the civil law system that includes law of torts and law of
contract. However, in common law countries, private law has a broader horizon in compared
to the civil law system, which includes the relationship of individuals with the government,
involving contract and tort law (Burrows 2013.). In this context, it comes under the purview
of private law and not public law. In many cases, there are a variety of private law that are
uncodified and are governed by the common law system. Private law includes civil law,
corporate law, labour law, et cetera.
The difference between public and private law can find its root in the Roman law
which has been derived by the countries that has a tradition of civil law in the early 19th
century, however it found its way to the countries following common law system as well.

2CONTRACT LAW
1. b.
Under English law, Precedent is referred to a judgment of the court which is to be
followed by the subsequent cases with similar facts and issues. It is a principle that has been
established in a previous case which is made binding on the court or other quasi-judicial body
to follow. The Common law system believes in deciding cases as per the established
principles as it would yield similar result for cases with similar facts, and this is only possible
by observing the Precedents of the higher courts. In this regards, the judges are bound by a
principle to follow Precedents which is known as Stare Decisis. The doctrine of Stare Decisis
directs the judges to follow the precedents that has been established within their ambit
(Anderlini, Felli, and Riboni 2014). In UK, the decision laid down by the House of Lords
binds its subordinate courts to follow its decisions.
1. c.
One of the basic advantages of this principle is that it allows the court to follow its
own laid down principles and does not overburden the court to re-evaluate its own accepted
doctrines and past decisions. In addition it is widely accepted that the earlier decisions held
by the court help the people to understand the rights and duties of the citizens, while some
area of the view that these can only be made to understand through publications (Burton
2013). As precedents are thoroughly and critically analysed judicial decisions, they are well-
established legal principles that are valuable for future references. They are not arbitrarily
passed as the court follow logical and legal reasoning before delivering the order. After the
court passes its judgment, it is widely available so that anyone can get hold of it, therefore
making it transparent. Stare Decisis is not mandatory though, as the courts always have its
discretion to implement the precedent on the case, as it is for the judges to decide whether a
case has similar facts as the precedent. Precedents help the advocates to advise the clients on

3CONTRACT LAW
exact legal point relevant to the case based on the already established principles. It enhances
the efficiency of the court by saving the valuable time of the court.
However, Precedent and its principle of Stare Decisis has their disadvantages as well
which often affects the merit of a case. The rigidity of precedents sometimes does not allow
the lower courts to have their own opinion on a matter and are bound by the decision of the
higher court. Sometimes, the court tend to make incorrect application of a Precedent as each
case differs from one another (Burton 2013). It also gets difficult to look for precedents in
certain cases that are extremely old and not so significant. A Precedent often holds a
retrospective effect which however does not suit criminal cases as the crime may have been
committed when there was no law that declared it to be unlawful. Therefore, there are several
circumstances where the principle of stare Decisis does not apply.