The Role and Significance of Judicial Precedent as a Source of Law

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical nature of judicial precedent as a source of
law, the historical stages of its formation, and its place in contemporary legal systems. The aim of the study is
to determine the legal significance of judicial precedent in the Anglo-Saxon and Romano-Germanic legal
systems, to reveal its distinctive features through a comparative-legal approach, and to assess the possibilities
of applying precedent within national legal systems. In the course of the research, historical, systemic,
formal-legal and comparative-legal methods were employed; these approaches made it possible to trace the
evolution of the emergence of precedent, to identify its role as a form of law-making, and to clarify its
relationship with judicial practice. The findings show that, although judicial precedent has been established as
a binding source of law in the common law system, in continental law countries it generally has an auxiliary
or guiding character. In the United Kingdom, the strict binding force of precedent is consolidated through the
doctrine of stare decisis, whereas in the United States its application is more flexible. In the Romano
Germanic legal system, courts primarily act as appliers of statutory law, and the binding force of precedent is
not formally recognised. In conclusion, the study argues that judicial precedent, while constituting an
important element of the mechanism of legal regulation, can be applied effectively only to the extent that it
corresponds to national legal traditions, the degree of independence of the judiciary, and the prevailing legal
culture.