DBWI: Judge-Made Law Still Applies to Present Day

Alright, I was just reading through the history of law and I came upon this article on how in the past, a judge's decision could become law. My question is, how would this system of judge-made law affect life in the present day if it still applies today?
 
Alright, I was just reading through the history of law and I came upon this article on how in the past, a judge's decision could become law. My question is, how would this system of judge-made law affect life in the present day if it still applies today?


Hum....? Judges does still make laws through their judgements in the common law world. Granted, it's not the same as primary legislations passed by the legislatiure, but rather the inteperation and application of legislations, but still considerd pasr of law.
 
It sounds like a system that would lead to all kinds of legal chaos; the law is already complicated and confusing enough with only one source of legislation, can you imagine what would happen if there hundreds of different judges who could all make their own laws?

OOC: We really ought to have a sticky that explains DBWI and some of the other common abrebiations. Anyway, a DBWI is a "Double Blind What If" where the posters place themselves in an alternate timeline and analyze what if something that happened in OTL were to occur in their ATL.
 
It sounds like a system that would lead to all kinds of legal chaos; the law is already complicated and confusing enough with only one source of legislation, can you imagine what would happen if there hundreds of different judges who could all make their own laws?

Most legislations are written in vague and generalized wordings to retain flexibility, with the panel codeas a possible exception. Therefore, the judges have to interpret the legislations to see how the objectives of the legislations is best persured in a particular case.

Consistency and continuity can be established if the decision of the first judge is obeyed by other judges presiding over later case.
 
I think that the legal profession would become much more complicated.
Yet, perhaps it would also be more simple in other ways.

To begin with, judges would have to certainly be of higher quality, perhaps elected by the people, or appointed by the governer-general or Prime Minister directly, instead of a judicial committee. The position however may become politicised, and thus judges and justices may have to serve terms, or face regular investigations for said committee?

Lawyers would have to more familar with important cases of the past, law school would be a lot harder.

On the other hand you would probably see more of a distinction between judges/justices and lawyers. This would be countered by less of a distinction between judges and the government; perhaps they could act as policy advisors to the crown on occasion?

The investigation and detailed analysis of the actus reus and mens rea would likely be supplemented with a more detailed analysis and dicussion of the jusdisprudence. This of course would be important if the decisions were to established a legal precedent.

Would the legal system be more free standing from the legislative and executive because of this? I think so, though it would also be more integrated into the other branches as well.
 
Most legislations are written in vague and generalized wordings to retain flexibility, with the panel codeas a possible exception. Therefore, the judges have to interpret the legislations to see how the objectives of the legislations is best persured in a particular case.

Consistency and continuity can be established if the decision of the first judge is obeyed by other judges presiding over later case.

This is a Double-Blind (BB), in which we pretend that the oppisite is true, or that we are speaking of a perspective in which that event happened different. In this premise we are assuming that the common law system doesn't exist. ;)
 
This is a Double-Blind (BB), in which we pretend that the oppisite is true, or that we are speaking of a perspective in which that event happened different. In this premise we are assuming that the common law system doesn't exist. ;)

I guess me pretending of not having a legal education is not a good performance.:D I shall continue to try my best.
 
Top