Blogging – My Most Valuable Advice
Online Law Journals Other names that refer to the legal directory are law blogging and online law journals. Entries in legal directory appear in a reverse chronological order. The online law journals are hitherto sources of information. It is possible to publish information found in the legal directory because of the strength of its software. The software in the legal directory allows even first-time authors to submit their work. The site is important all stakeholders in legal matters. Practice groups, law firms and individual attorneys with the aim of establishing themselves have all the reasons to publish law blogs. The reliability and legal authority of these groups are enhanced. Law blogging is a form of centralized approach that lets members of the legal fraternity to quickly and easily share knowledge. Lawyers and law firms earns loyalty when they have legal directories. The online journal is one of the successful marketing strategies.
A Beginners Guide To Resources
Most scholars in the legal profession concur in defining legal precedent as sources of the law that involve past decisions by various juries developing law for use by other judges in future when making decisions on related or similar cases. The United Kingdom judicial system applies precedence based on stare decisis. The application within the English system developed from Latin including its translations.
A Brief History of Blogging
Loosely, it means standing by decisions already made. It is the responsibility of stare decisis to offer certainty and fairness in law. This comes in two segments: obiter dicta and ratio decidendi. Standards of law used by a judge to arrive at a particular judgment while concluding the case defines what ratio decidendi entail. The facts applied in the delivery of a particular decision must fall in the speech provided at the end of the case. Literaly, ratio decidendi refers to a rule implied or expressed by a judge as an important factor in arriving at his or her conclusion. On the other hand, obiter dictum constitutes issues said by the presiding judge according to the legal dictionary. They constitute part of another judge’s in the future can follow. An illustrated case of obiter dicta could be the decision of the judge if the facts turn out as different from the previous case. The case explains why the old facts cannot bind the new judge while reaching his conclusion. In other occasions, cutting an exact difference between obiter dicta and ratio decidendi becomes difficult because they flow in a continuous manner. While making judgment in the Broome v. Cassell case, Lord Hailsham from Marylebone put forth that, it is a necessity for every court in the lower tie to agree loyally with decisions made by courts above in the hierarchy. They include the Court of Appeal because it comes second in command.