Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
On Law, Politics, and Judicialization$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Martin Shapiro and Alec Stone Sweet

Print publication date: 2002

Print ISBN-13: 9780199256488

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003

DOI: 10.1093/0199256489.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 23 March 2019

Towards a Theory of Stare Decisis

Towards a Theory of Stare Decisis

Chapter:
(p.102) Towards a Theory of Stare Decisis
Source:
On Law, Politics, and Judicialization
Author(s):

Martin Shapiro (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/0199256489.003.0003

This paper, which was originally published in The Journal of Legal Studies in 1972, is the first of two that examine some of the problems posed by the method of law-making that is associated with the rule of precedent and the common law doctrine of stare decisis, which is here proposed as a new theory. Shapiro defines stare decisis as loosely meaning the practice of courts in deciding new cases in accordance with precedents, and in the ensuing discussion of the theory, he draws upon insights from both communications theory and previous work of his own on the decision-making process in tort law. He first examines the three branches of communications theory with respect to legal discourse: syntactics (the arrangement, transmission, and receipt of signals or signs, whose key concepts are information, redundancy, and feedback), semantics (the meaning of signals to people), and pragmatics (the impact of signal transmission and human behaviour), and then applies these concepts to the evolution of policy formulation in tort law in the United States and Britain. The survival of stare decisis as the dominant mode of legal discourse, particularly in the area of common law, is explained as its strength in its dual and mutually supporting contents of syntactic and semantic redundancy.

Keywords:   Britain, common law, communications theory, decision-making, feedback, information, law-making, policy formulation, pragmatics, precedent, redundancy, semantics, signalling, signals, stare decisis, syntactics, tort law, United States

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .