LEGAL PRINCIPLE: JUDICIAL PRECEDENT – Stare Decisis – Binding Effect of Higher Courts’ Decisions
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
This doctrine lays down the golden rule that decisions of higher courts of the land are binding on the lower courts in the land. And decisions of courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction are, for all intents and purposes, binding as between those courts. In all cases, decisions made per incuriam are not included for obvious reasons and a court may depart from its earlier decision if it is satisfied that the decision was wrong and there is a need to reverse or alter it in the interest of justice.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Umaru Atu Kalgo, JSC, in Global Transport Oceanico S.A. & Anor v. Free Enterprises Nig. Ltd. (2001) NLC-128331998(SC) at p. 14; Paras B–D.
"This doctrine lays down the golden rule that decisions of higher courts of the land are binding on the lower courts in the land. And decisions of courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction are, for all intents and purposes, binding as between those courts. In all cases, decisions made per incuriam are not included for obvious reasons and a court may depart from its earlier decision if it is satisfied that the decision was wrong and there is a need to reverse or alter it in the interest of justice."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Stare decisis requires lower courts to follow decisions of higher courts. Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction are also bound by each other’s decisions (horizontal stare decisis). Exceptions exist: decisions made per incuriam (through inadvertence or ignorance of binding authority) are not binding. A court may depart from its earlier decision if satisfied it was wrong and justice requires reversal. However, departure should be rare and justified. The doctrine ensures consistency, predictability, and respect for judicial hierarchy. It prevents endless re-litigation of settled principles. The per incuriam exception prevents perpetuation of manifest errors. Co-ordinate courts should generally follow each other to avoid forum shopping.