In 1066, the Norman Conquest reshaped England's legal landscape by replacing fragmented local courts with a unified royal system. Before this event, shires and hundreds operated their own folk courts while urban boroughs and merchant fairs maintained separate jurisdictions. Large landholders held manorial courts that handled disputes among tenants on their estates. The Catholic Church also ran its own court system to adjudicate canon law issues including family matters. Henry II became king in 1154 and began sending judges from his Curia Regis to hear cases across the country. These itinerant justices received writs under the great seal and resolved disputes based on local customs they interpreted. After hearing cases, judges returned to London to discuss decisions with colleagues before filing them for future reference. By the thirteenth century, these recorded decisions formed the basis of what would become known as common law. The Year Books first appeared in 1268 as compilations of medieval court cases that documented developing doctrines. Thomas Bracton wrote On the Laws and Customs of England during this period to explain emerging principles. The English Court of Common Pleas opened after Magna Carta in 1215 to try lawsuits between ordinary citizens where the monarch had no direct interest. Judges sat permanently in Westminster Hall except during vacation periods between four annual terms.
Stare Decisis Principles
The doctrine of stare decisis means to stand by things decided and requires courts to follow precedents established in prior similar cases. When a judge encounters a case with facts resembling an earlier decision, they must adopt the same legal interpretation unless extraordinary reasons exist to depart. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. criticized blind adherence to old rules in his 1897 article The Path of the Law stating it was revolting to have no better reason than historical precedent. He argued that modern jurisprudence should rely on statistics and economics rather than ancient maxims from Henry IV's reign. Courts distinguish between binding precedent from higher authorities within their jurisdiction and persuasive authority from lower or sister courts. In federal circuits, decisions by one panel bind district courts but only influence other circuits. Most U.S. courts of appeal sit in three-judge panels where the earlier decision controls if conflicts arise. Only the full court sitting en banc can overrule a previous panel decision. Some specialized courts like the Federal Circuit always hear cases en banc meaning every active judge participates in each new ruling. This structure ensures older decisions survive only when they do not conflict with newer interpretations. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom gained power to unify criminal law decisions across England Wales and Northern Ireland starting in 2009. Before that date the House of Lords held this authority through its Practice Statement of 1966.