LIBOR rigging: Difference between revisions

LIBOR rigging (view source)

423 bytes added , 5 April

no edit summary

82,976

edits

@@ Line 169: / Line 169: @@
 ====Stare decisis====
-This is a real lawyer nerd-out but the court considered the effect of [[Doctrine of precedent|precedent]] on its decision and was confronted with an odd scenario. A given court is generally bound by its own prior decisions in analogous cases.  Usually, these cases are unrelated. Here the prior decisions were interlocutory hearings in ''this actual case'', where certain legal points were escalated to the Court of Appeal during the high court trial.
+{{drop|T|his is a}} real lawyer nerd-out,  but in forming its decision the Court of Appeal was confronted with some of its own prior rulings and judgments. The common law [[doctrine of precedent]] means an appeal court is generally bound by its own previous decisions in analogous cases.  Usually, these cases are unrelated. But here the prior decisions were “interlocutory” hearings in ''the actual case being appealed'' — certain legal points were “escalated” to the Court of Appeal during the High Court trial.
+On one hand, it should not make a difference that it is the same case. On the other, that makes a bit of a mockery of the appeal process if the appellate court is bound by the judgment being appealed against, which is what the Court found itself to be here. This should, at least, be a decent justification for a further appeal to the Supreme Court.
 {{sa}}