A Level Law Practice Exam

What distinguishes a binding precedent from persuasive precedent?

1. Binding precedents must be followed by lower courts

2. Only binding precedents create statutes

3. Persuasive precedents can create new laws

4. Binding precedents are subjective in nature

The correct answer is: Binding precedents must be followed by lower courts

The correct answer identifies a fundamental principle of the hierarchy of courts in the legal system. Binding precedent refers to decisions made by higher courts that lower courts in the same jurisdiction must follow. This concept ensures consistency and predictability in the law, as lower courts are obligated to adhere to established legal principles set forth by superior courts. In contrast, persuasive precedent does not have the same authority. While it can influence a court's decision, lower courts are not required to follow it. Persuasive precedents may include decisions from courts of the same level, courts from other jurisdictions, or even obiter dicta within a binding decision. They can certainly inform and guide a court's reasoning, but they do not compel compliance in the manner that binding precedents do. This distinction is crucial within legal practice, as it helps delineate the structure of judicial decision-making and the hierarchy in which legal norms are established and followed.