Transcript LEAGAL_REASONING__in_Judicial_Processx

LEGAL REASONING
A )Legal Reasoning and Logic
B ) LEGAL REASONING IN JUDICIAL
PROCESS
Legal Reasoning and Logic
• Legal Reasoning and Logic:
Logic, Premise, inductive and deductive
reasoning, the limitations of legal reasoning.
• Legal Concepts, Standards, Rules, Principles
and Issues in Law
• Language of the law
Legal Reasoning and Logic
Introduction:
• The reasoning of lawyers is
practical reasoning. It is
reasoning that is oriented
towards action. Judges do
not decide cases on the
case before them, but try to
see how the particular case
will fit into existing legal
rules, categories or
concepts before they take
their decision.
Logic
• Logic is that branch of
reasoning in philosophy which
tries to distinguish a good
arguement from a bad one. It
tries to detect errors or
fallacies in reasoning.
• Logic explains why people
think in certain ways. It comes
up with rules to detect the
consistency and validity of any
given argument. Most logical
arguments contain premises or
propositions.
• A premise or proposition is a
form of conversation.
Legal Reasoning and Logic
Deductive reasoning
Deductive reasoning is
concerned with determining
rules for a valid argument .
Deductive reasoning is often
applied to statutes. It is
assumed that from a major
premise, a minor premise is
arrived at; e.g.:
 All girls like to plait their
hair
 Funke is a girl
 Therefore Funke likes to
plait her hair.
Inductive reasoning
This is a form of reasoning
from a particular proposition
to a general proposition.
Lawyers use this to select the
relevant cases to back up their
arguments. Doorset Yatcht v
Home ‘Office [1970] A.C 1004
 Because X & Y resemble
each other in some ways;
 X & Y ought to resemble
each other in every other
way.
Legal Reasoning and logic
Limitations of legal reasoning:
• Judges are limited by their world experience and training
in taking decisions.
• Judges in taking decisions are comparing like items or
cases. But while the lay man can depend on common
sense, judges have to ensure that his decisions tally with
legal concepts and principles.
• This is to avoid miscarriage of justice. At all times, the
public is free to criticise decisions if they are arrived
unjustly.
• Judges are also constrained by the concept of fair
hearing. In every new case, litigants must be properly
heard.
Legal Concepts, Standards, Rules, Principles and
Issues in Law
• Concept and Rules: Legal
systems make use of
concepts. Concepts are
activated through rules.
These allow us to determine
for example when a
contract exists. Legal rules
move the court in another
direction. The judge when
applying concepts should
adopt some measure of
flexibility. This is because
the law is dynamic
• Legal Standards: It is a
model accepted as correct
by custom, consent or
authority. Legal Rules and
principles are two types of
legal standards. In Nigeria,
there is a rule that a simple
contract is not valid
without consideration.
Principle: Nigerian courts
recognize the principle that
people should not benefit
from wrong doing.
• Rules: Rules in legal
reasoning are bound to
change as the rules are
applied.
Language of the law
• Language is directive:
Legal Language is based
on primary(English)
language. The legal
language is secondary.
Legal language is used as
a means of social control.
The purpose of all legal
documents is to
influence men’s
behaviour for good. But
the language may be
limited to capture new
situations.
• Language has
Psychological Effect:
Words spoken by
authorised personnel are
authoritative in law.
Psychologically, people
obey directives because
of the nature of person
performing it. For
example the priest or
registrar of marriage has
the power to conduct a
wedding which is valid.
Language of the Law
• Legal Effects: The
language of the law has
legal effects:
• People are
psychologically used to
obeying them
• State organs use law to
direct the state
• The penalty for
disobedience is sanctions
• The law must refer to
social customs to be
effective.
• The interpretation of
language by the courts:
• Sharp consequences hang
on the legal meaning
courts attach to words.
• Judges therefore try their
best to give the right
interpretation to words.
• Still most times they have
difficulty at arriving at
right interpretation. See
Mayor of Southport v
Morris [1893] 1 QB 359
at 361
Legal Reasoning in the Judicial Process
Legal Reasoning in the Judicial Process
 The doctrine of precedents
• Ratio Decidendi
• Orbiter dictum
• Per incuriam
• Persuasive
 The Court Hierachy
• The Supreme court
• The Federal Court of Appeal
• The High Court
• The Magistrate court, customary courts , district
courts.
Class Assignment
• A) Vividly discuss the court hierarchy in
Nigeria, by outlining the origin and roles of
various courts such as the Supreme Court,
Federal Court of Appeal, High Court,
Magistrate and District Courts.
• B) How does the judgement of the Supreme
court affect the court itself, and how does it
also affect other courts in the hierachy?
The Doctrine of Precedents
• What is a Judicial Precedence.--- the lawyer who is
faced with an unfamiliar problem seek a precedence
as a guide to unavelling the present situation.
• This is reffered to in the English Legal system, as well
as Nigeria as ‘stare decisis’
• Judges refer to previous court decisions to justify the
conclusion reached in the instant case.
• Law Reporting: Their has to be an efficient system of
law reporting, for the doctrine of precedents to be
effective. The doctrine of judicial precedent is a
common law doctrine which applies applies to only
those courts empowered to administer common law.
Judicial Precedents
• Ratio Decidendi: When a decision has been reached by
a court of superior jurisdiction, lawyers are interested
in the principles being laid out. The binding part of the
decision is a combination of tested principles and can
lead to formulation of new law.
• This is known as ratio decidendi or the reason for the
decision. This is binding on later judges especially if
made by court of superior jurisdiction. These judges
may in future decide to narrow the scope of the ratio
to suit further cases.
Ratio Decidendi
• See the caseof Carlil v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1982]
All E.R.ReP. 127, where the ratio is that a contract
cannot bemade with thewhole world, but but an offer
can be made to the world at large.
• The advert in this instancewas an offer, there was
acceptance to it by mrs carlil.
• Her using the product activated the contract.
• case may have more than one ratio decidendi.
• See Scruttons v. Midland Silicones [1962] AC 446,
where the House of Lords amended its reasoning in
the previous case of Elder Dempstar v. Paterzon
Zochonis [1924] ac 522
Judicial Preedents
• Orbiter Dicta: These are sayings by the judge
which are less central to the decision. They
are ‘sayings by the way.’
• They concern broader principles of law which
may not be applicable in an instant case.
• Per Incuriam: This is a decision of the court
arrived at without attention being drawn to
the relevant statute or authority. It is usually
not binding.
Judicial Precedents
Persuasive Precedents or per incuriam: This
includes:
• All orbiter
• All dissenting judgement
• All minority judgement
• The ratio of a lower court in hierachy
• The ratio of a court abroad or privy council
Writings of authors of repute.
• Custom
The Court Hierachy
• Under ‘stares decisis’ a lower court is bound
to follow the decisions of a higher court in the
hierarchy which has not been overruled.
• Such a decision of higher court must not have
been over ruled by another higher court.
• a lower court can choose which ot two ratios
of higher courts it will abide by. See Chime v.
Elikwu [1965]NMLR 71
The Court Hierachy
• The courts to which ‘stares Decisis ‘ apply to in
Nigeria include;
• The Supreme Court (Foremerly the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council)
• The Federal Court of Appeal
• The high Courts
• The Magistrate Courts and the District Courts.
The Supreme Court
• The Supreme Court is at the top of the
hierachy, and replaced the privy council as the
highest court in Nigeria.
• The decisions of thePrivy Councl are binding
on the Supreme Court. See See Johnson v.
Lawanson [1971] 1 All NLR 56
• The Supreme Courtcan over rule itself. See
Odeneye v. Savage 1964 NMLR 115; Williams
v. Akinwunmi [1966] 1 ANLR 115
The Supreme Court
• The Supreme Court feels comfortable to overrule
itself, even if the decision is more than 10 years old.
• See Johhson V Lawanson [1971] 1 All NLR 56 where
Supreme Court overturned the decision of a full house
of 5 Justices.
• This attitude is also applicable in the House of Lords
which is the highest court in England See the Practice
Direction of 1966
• The Supreme court uses precedents to decide what is
law, and when to apply them to individual cases.
• Its decisions are binding on all other courts to which
the doctrine of precedent applies.
The Federal Court of Appeal
• The Supreme Court Rule of 1961 (L.N.96 of
1961) applies to the Federal Court of Appeal.
• However, where there are lacuna’s, rule 36of
order VII of the Supreme Court Rules provide
that where no other provision is made, the
rule of precedent as practised in England will
be applicable.
• This court replaced the West African Court of
Appeal. (WACA)
• The rule of precedent as practised in the Court
of Appeal are as follows:
The Federal Court of Appeal
• Generally, the court may decide to choose
among several of it’s conflicting to follow any
one of its decisions,
• Any of its decisions, which though not over
ruled, but in conflict with decisions of the
Supreme Court of Nigeria may not be
adopted.
• The court may not follow its own decisions if
it was arrived at per incuriam.
The Federal Court of Appeal
• The Court is bound by the decisions of the
Committee of the PrivyCouncil before it was
abolished, as the former highest court.
• They are also bound by the decisions of the
West African Court of Appeal W.A.C.A, before
it was abolished.
The High Courts
• The state high court are on the same revenue
with the Federal revenue court as well as the
National Industrial Court.
• Matters within the legislative competence of one
state does not bind other courts on the same
hierachy.
• Section 35 of the High Court Laws in force in
northern Nigeria (See N.N.Laws 1963. Cap 49)
provide for the use of the criminal procedure
code in the North.
The High Courts
• Local legislation has received into Nigeria
rules of practice observed by the High Court
of Justice of England, when our courts have
no provision on such, especially in civil cases.
• Going by the rules in England, a high court
may sit as the court of first instance with one
judge, or an appellate court if two judges are
sitting.
The High Courts
• A judge in the south is not bound by the
decisions of another high court sitting as a
court of first instance or sitting as a n
appellate court with two judges.
• This is because they are regarded as judges of
equal or co –ordinate jurisdiction
• But a high court in the north sitting as
appellate with two judges, binds the courts
sitting with one judge.
The High Court
• The practice in the north is in line with the
practice in England . Here when the high court
sits with two judges or more, it is known as a
divisional court and its decisions are binding
on the other high courts.
• See the statement of Lord Goddard in Police
Authority for Huddersfield v. Watson [1947]
K.B 842 at 848
• Every High Court in Nigeria, in exercise of its
federal jurisdiction binds all magistrate courts
in the country, and district courts in the north.
The High Courts
• A High Court is bound by the decisions of the
Supreme Court and Federal Court of Appeal.
• A High court in Nigeria sitting as a court of
appeal is bound by its own decisions. But:
• A) it can decide which of two conflicting
decisions to follow
• B) it cannot follow its own decision which has
been over ruled buy the supreme Court.
Magistrate Courts and District Courts
• Magistrate courts of a state are bound by the
decisions of the High Court of the state.
• This is by virtue of their position in the hierarchy
of courts to which the doctrine of judicial
precedent applies.
• District courts in the north are also bound by the
decisions of the high court of the state.
• Magistrate courts and district courts are not
bound by their previous decisions , and can
always exercise an option whether or not to
follow such precedents.
Shifting of Fact and Law in Court
• Section 2 (10) of the Evidence Act, Cap. 112 LFN
1990 defines a fact to include:
• A) Anything, state of things or relation of things
capable of being perceived by the senses
• B) Any mental condition of which any person is
conscious
• The term shifting of fact is the obligation or
evidential burden on the part of parties to a
proceeding to prove to the court that the fact he
asserts exist. This will enable the court give
judgement. See s 134 (1) of the Evidence Act
Shifting of Fact and Law in Court
• Burden of Proof: Evidential burden is different
from burden of proof. Burden of proof is the
duty to convince the courts either beyond
reasonable doubt or preponderance of evidence.
• In civil cases, burden of proof rests on the
plaintiff. He who asserts must prove. Here
mostly, it is on preponderance of evidence
• The burden is criminal matters rest on the
prosecution, and it is beyond reasonable doubt.
• See s. 140 of the Evidence Act Cap. 112, LFN
Shifting of Law
• Juria novit Curia: It is for the court to know
the law. Where the parties cannot cite the
relevant laws, it is for the court to know the
law.
• As such, the burden of applying the true facts
shifts to the judge who is presumed to know
the law.
• This is necessary to avoid a miscarriage of
justice.