Administrative Tribunals And Decision From Other Common Law Countries

3074 Words Oct 19th, 2014 13 Pages
4. Administrative tribunals and decision from other common law countries
Beside the judicial functions of courts, administrative tribunals are another official bodies that adhere the rights to settle the disputes, and they are established within federal and state jurisdictions. The well-established practice of the doctrine of precedent is also found in the operation of administrative tribunals, where the inferior tribunals follow decisions of superior but those decisions are not necessary carry the formal precedential authority. In most cases, disputes parties in the tribunals could appeal to the court, where the tribunals are bound by the precedent of the court.
The decisions from other common law jurisdiction such as United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canadian and United States have no authority on Australian courts but Australian judges rather relied on them as an argument in the judgment particular when confront with the absence of binding authority. Traditionally, the decision of superior English courts are paid the highest regards, especially when there is a conflicting of foreign court decisions, and are frequently cited by Australian judges owing to the fact that British is the mother nation of Australia.

E. Ratio decisis and Obiter dicta
According to doctrine of stare decisis, not all statements of rule of law in the precedent are binding. The ration that leads to judgement and has the legal binding force is call ratio decisis, while the supporting ration to that…
Open Document