Stare Decisis et Non Quieta Movere

Stare Decisis et Non Quieta Movere

Literal Meaning

To stand by what has been decided and do not unsettle the established

Origin: Latin

Explanations

It is a significant aspect of the Indian legal system. We know that in India we follow a hierarchal structure of court, with the Supreme Court as an apex judicial authority, followed by the High Courts at each State and then other subordinate courts. The maxim implicates the binding decision of higher courts, which the lower courts have to adhere to. Thus, the decisions of Supreme Courts and High Courts are binding on the lower or sub-ordinate courts. This maxim is closely associated with the Doctrine of Precedent, which states that the court can rely on the decision of superior courts while deciding the matter with similar legal issues.

India has adopted this maxim due to colonial influence. This maxim has deep roots in the English Common Law System. It ensures stability, consistency, and predictability in judicial practice in the application of law.

Application of the Maxim

Binding- In common law parlance, lower courts are bound by the decisions of higher courts. For example, decisions made by the Supreme Court are binding on all subordinate courts.

Persuasive- Decisions from courts in other jurisdictions or lower courts within the same jurisdiction may be considered as guidance but are not binding.

Benefits of Stare Decisis et Non-Quieta Movere

• Legal Certainty and Predictability- This legal maxim removes the element of uncertainty and promotes clarity in law and uniformity. The subordinate courts can adapt the decision of the higher court unanimously and without dissent, which brings a sense of certainty and predictability in the application of the law.
• Judicial Efficiency- By the presence of precedent, the judges need not be re-litigated on the same matter, which saves the time and resources of the judiciary. It also prevents needless lawsuits.

Criticism of Stare Decisis et Non Quieta Movere

• Rigidity- Strict adherence to stare decisis can lead to rigidity, making it difficult for the law to evolve and adapt to new societal values, technological advancements, and changing social norms.
• Errors- Many times, judicial rulings that are perceived to be errors are upheld as precedent law.

Article 141 of the Indian Constitution promotes the concept of “Stare Decisis et Non Quieta Movere”, and states that “the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.” Thus, the Indian Constitution expressly supports the idea of stare decisis. Though the principle of stare decisis is crucial in administering justice as it ensures certainty, predictability, flexibility, and stability in the application of law it should also recognize that at times, justice requires a departure from past decisions to adapt to changing societal norms, behavior, and attitudes.

Case Law

Keshavananda Bharti v State of Kerala (1973)

This case talks about the Parliamentary amending power. The Apex Court established the doctrine of basic structure, holding that while Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its basic structure. This case set a precedent that has been followed consistently, ensuring that the basic structure of the Constitution could not be abrogated.

Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community v. State of Maharashtra (2005)

This Court held that a smaller bench of the Court is bound by the decisions of larger benches. Thus, this case emphasizes on hierarchical nature of precedent, ensuring that lower benches adhere to the rulings of larger or coordinated benches to maintain consistency in judicial decisions.

Indian courts have emphasized the importance of adhering to judicial precedents while also acknowledging the need for flexibility in certain circumstances.