Legal Directories
A legal directory is also called a law blogging site and an online law journal in other quarters. It is a type of online journal that shows entries in a reverse chronological order. The websites are powerful information sources.
The blogging software is powerful enough to store information that can be published. The software in the legal directory allows even first-time authors to submit their work. Players in the legal sector use the site effectively.
Online law journals are good for Practice groups, law firms and individual attorneys. They enhance the reliability and legal authority of these groups. Law blogging is a form of centralized approach that lets members of the legal fraternity to quickly and easily share knowledge. Taking part in the sharing earns loyalty to law firms and lawyers. The online journal is one of the successful marketing strategies.
Legal directories agree on defining legal precedent as these sources of the law that involve past decisions by various juries developing law for use by other judges in future when making decisions on related or similar cases. For instance, The United Kingdom judicial system applies precedence based on stare decisis. Including translations the English system developed from Latin .
It means standing by decisions already made in common corridors. In law, stare decisis to offer certainty and fairness. This is in two segments: obiter dicta and ratio decidendi. The law based on by a judge to arrive at a particular judgment while concluding the case defines what ratio decidendi entails.
The reasons used in the delivery of a particular decision must fall in the speech provided at the end of the case. Literaly, ratio decidendi refers to a rule implied or expressed by a judge as an important factor in arriving at his or her click conclusion.
The online law journal defines obiter dictum constitutes issues said by the presiding judge according to the legal dictionary. They constitute part of another judge's in the future can follow. Among other things, an example of obiter dicta could be the decision of the judge if the facts turn out as different from the previous case.
In this context, the old facts cannot bind the new judge while reaching his conclusion. In other occasions, cutting an exact difference between obiter dicta and ratio decidendi becomes difficult because they flow in a continuous manner.
While making judgment in the Broome v. Cassell case, Lord Hailsham from Marylebone put forth that, it is a necessity for every court in the lower tie to agree loyally with decisions made by courts above in the hierarchy. The Court of Appeal was included because it comes second in command.
For further reading/watching, please visit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blog .
