چکیده:
One of the characteristics of the English judicial system as the cradle of common law is the existence of the rule of precedent and its use in the proceedings. This rule, which is based on creating unity and commonality between different customs, requires judges to follow previous opinions. Of course, the judgment is binding if it is issued by the Supreme Court and is consistent with the new event. However, at present, this institution does not have an exact equivalent in the legal system of civil law, but In this article, it has been tried to show that, French law has long used tools with a similar function under the name of regulatory decisions. On the other hand, Iranian law has not equivalent for it and in the case law of Iran, the unanimous rulings of the Supreme Court cannot be introduced as its equivalent. Furthermore, the Islamic judiciary has also followed from such an approach.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In fact, obligating judges to follow legal rules accepted by previous judges stems from the provisions of the doctrine of precedent in the Common Law system (Rafiee, 1392: 192).
Additionally, the extraordinary importance and respect given to high court judges have also played a significant role in shaping the doctrine of precedent; for, according to existing tradition in England, they are selected from among the elders of the legal profession and possess extensive scientific knowledge and judicial experience that has granted them a unique status of knowledge and virtue (Khadem al-Umum, 1343: 30).
In this regard, the rules and principles of English law are stated which, due to their generality, are binding in subsequent similar cases, and in fact, it is these reasons and grounds that create the doctrine of precedent (Taghizadeh, 1381: 127).
The predictability of judges' decisions in new cases by lawyers is one of the most important functions of this rule, as when events are established, they become the law governing a specific subject (Taghizadeh, 1381: 128); whereas in French law, due to the non-acceptance of the doctrine of precedent, contradictory judgments are issued regarding similar matters (Ghoraei, 1347: 127).
For, the privilege of judicial precedent in English law is the obligation that judges have to observe the rules of high courts (Katouzian, 1381: 595).
(
, 
, 
)
