why did the house of lords issue the practice statement in 1966
Practice Statement - wikipedia Practice Statement Jump to : navigation , search The Practice Statement ( 1966 ) 3 All ER 77 was a statement made in the House of Lords by Lord Gardiner LC on July 26 , 1966 on behalf of himself and the Lords of Appeal in ordinary , that they would depart from precedent in the Lords in order to achieve justice . Contents ( hide ) 1 Background 2 Content 3 See also 4 Notes Background ( edit ) Until the year 1966 , the House of Lords in the United Kingdom was bound to follow all of its previous decisions under the principle of stare decisis , even if this created `` injustice '' and `` unduly restrict ( s ) the proper development of the law '' ( London Tramways Co. v London County Council ( 1898 ) AC 375 ) . The Practice Statement 1966 is authority for the House of Lords to depart from their previous decisions . It does not affect the precedential value of cases in lower courts ; all other courts that recognise the Supreme Court ( formerly the House of Lords ) as the court of last resort are still bound by Supreme Court decisions . Before this , the only way a binding precedent could be avoided was to create new legislation on the matter . A germane example is the case of Anderton v Ryan ( 1985 ) where the House of Lords interpreted the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 in such a way as to make the Act virtually ineffective . Only one year later in R v Shivpuri ( 1986 ) Lord Bridge ( a member of the erroneous majority in Anderton ) acknowledged the error and said `` the Practice Statement is an effective abandonment of our pretension to infallibility . If a serious error embodied in a decision of this House has been distorted by the law , the sooner it is corrected the better '' . By contrast , in Knuller v DPP , Lord Reid , who had previously given a strong dissenting judgment in Shaw v DPP , said while he still disagreed with the majority decision in that case , in the interests of certainty he would not overturn Shaw ( even though the Practice Statement had given authority to do so ) . Content ( edit ) This is the text of the Practice Statement : `` Their Lordships regard the use of precedent as an indispensable foundation upon which to decide what is the law and its application to individual cases . It provides at least some degree of certainty upon which individuals can rely in the conduct of their affairs , as well as a basis for orderly development of legal rules . Their Lordships nevertheless recognise that too rigid adherence to precedent may lead to injustice in a particular case and also unduly restrict the proper development of the law . They propose therefore , to modify their present practice and , while treating former decisions of this house as normally binding , to depart from a previous decision when it appears right to do so . In this connection they will bear in mind the danger of disturbing retrospectively the basis on which contracts , settlement of property , and fiscal arrangements have been entered into and also the especial need for certainty as to the criminal law . This announcement is not intended to affect the use of precedent elsewhere than in this House . '' -- Lord Gardiner 's statement in the House of Lords , July 26 , 1966 . See also ( edit ) Re Spectrum Plus Ltd Notes ( edit ) Jump up ^ See also ( 1966 ) 1 WLR 1234 ; ( 1966 ) 2 Lloyd 's Rep. 151 ; ( 1986 ) 83 Cr . App . R. 191 ( Note ) ; ( 1966 ) 110 S.J. 584 Jump up ^ 1985 AC 560 Jump up ^ 1987 AC 1 Jump up ^ The English Legal System ( 17th ed ) - Slapper v Kelly - ISBN 9 781138 944459 Jump up ^ Knuller ( Publishing , Printing and Promotions ) Ltd. v. DPP ( 1973 ) A.C. 435 Jump up ^ Shaw v DPP ( 1962 ) AC 220 Retrieved from `` https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Practice_Statement&oldid=724779945 '' Categories : 1966 in law 1966 in the United Kingdom Statements ( law ) House of Lords Talk Contents About Wikipedia Add links This page was last edited on 11 June 2016 , at 12 : 37 . About Wikipedia
1. Practice Statement 1966
2. House of Lords
3. Departure from precedent
4. Stare decisis
5. Legal rules development