Doctrine of Binding Precedent

Introduction

The doctrine of biding is generally referred to as a stare decisis, which has worked as a fundamental segment of the English Legal system. Under the rule ship of King Henry II, the doctrine of binding precedent was initiated; with his vision of centralizing the justice administration, the following steps were undertaken by the ruler. He ensured to direct the royal commissioners on tour, through which the King was able to identify the issues and problems which were being faced by the locals in regard to legal disputes. These commissioners were later known as the circuit Judges.[1].

The following has been ensuring stability along with consistency in the legal system when decision-making is considered.[2]. The Latin principle dictates that the courts executing on a lower level are obliged to adhere to the legal rulings that have been developed and formulated by the higher court in the scenario when both the courts are dealing with the same case.

The doctrine of biding has helped in developing a sense of predictability, transparency, and uniformity within the legal framework that has contributed to keeping the rule of law along with the administration within place. The legal framework of the UK has a hierarchy that follows: Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court, Country Court, crown courts.[3]. The superior courts have the responsibility of overruling decisions that have been formulated by the lower-level courts within specific cases which are entirely based upon their choices.

The following essay will help in effectively understanding the diverse roles and nature of the Doctrine by understanding the role that the judiciary has to play in its practical implication. The essay will also help in understanding the importance that the court hierarchy holds along with its proper implications. By effectively understanding and analyzing the provisions of the case law and the provisions of the legislative[4]. The essay helps in understanding and decoding the associated benefits of the Doctrine of binding precedent within the English legal system.

Role of the Judiciary in Applying the Doctrine

The judges of the English legal system are responsible for effectively analyzing and applying the law. The judges are well trusted and respected by the locals and the government, which raises their responsibility towards the community. The following roles are further extended to the different statutes of the parliament along with the common law and its principles, which have helped in making effective and fair judicial decisions during the case.

Suppose you are facing any issues of legal dispute. In that case, the judges will ensure to analyze your case with great intensity and ensure to effectively apply the correct and relevant legislation, which helps in providing the right applicability of the crucial legal principles that best renovate with the legal principles. Effectively interpreting the statutes helps the judges in decoding and driving more focus on their legislative intent, which allows them effectively understand the societal norms. The judges make sure to keep their judgments relevant to the laws while maintaining responsiveness to the contemporary issues of the case.

The judges have a vital role to play in the development of the common laws with the help of decisions in terms of the case that they have undertaken. The following function of the judges is to help the judges feel empowered and allows them to overcome the issues that are present in the legal principles that are associated with the legal principles.[5]. The following role of the judge helps in providing the required evolution and transformation within the legal system.

The judges get to practice and apply discretionary powers in the practical implication of the precedents while considering the different factors that are much relevant and authorities with the previous decisions. While confined to the decisions the judges of the higher court are considered within the same hierarchy, the judges have the discretion that allows them to effectively distinguish or even can overrule the precedent within some specific or unusual circumstances[6]. The following is done when the situation seems urgent or extensively crucial, which helps the judges in serving justice while effectively resolving the societal issues.

In the practical world, the judges are required to take the relevant cases into consideration that resonate with the values of the law and the legislation while effectively applying them in the doctrine of binding precedent. They are required to effectively go through the factual similarities in the present case that have been developed from the precedents ends, which helps the judges in determining the proper application of the previous decisions. Through this process, the judges are able to ensure consistency along with predictability with the legal outcomes that help in promoting the rule of law and boosting the confidence of the public.

Henceforth, the judges are required to effectively analyze the provisions of the legislature within the conjunction that is associated with the precedent that helps in effectively analyzing and implying the law with utter accuracy[7]. By keeping pace with the statutory implication, the judges have been able to maintain the dignity of the legal framework that ensure the formulation of the right judicial decisions that are much associated with the legislative intent of the judges[8].

The judges are obliged to imply effective and result driven reasoning during the course of the precedent implication, while effectively understanding the principles along with the policy considerations that are associated with the previous decisions. The judges ensures to develop a practical reasoning and rationale that helps in the right application and the alignment with the principles of the legal framework.

The role of the judges in the application of the Doctrine of binding is crucial as it helps in the effective maintenance of the stability and fairness within the English legal system. By thorough analyzing and interpreting the law with diligence and discretion the judiciary helps in formulating sound reasoning, this helps and contributes in the effective administration of the justice.

Significance of Court Hierarchy in Relation to the Doctrine

The structuring of the English legal system, is done while maintaining a clear hierarchy which provides a clear and precise delineation among the courts that has been done within lower to high level courts. While considered the lowest court within the English legal system, Magistrates courts and the County courts are considered[9]. The following courts have the responsibility of dealing with the small level issues including criminal offenses along with the civil disputes. The following courts are required to take cation which have been recommended by the magistrates and the district judges.

Talkin about the hierarchy, the Crown Court, high court, court of appeal and lastly the Supreme Court is at the highest of the hierarchy. The following levels of the court has their own roles and responsibilities followed by distinct level of authority over decision making. the higher courts ensure to review the decisions that are being made by the small courts[10].

The jurisdictional differences among courts are limited by the kind of cases that they deal with, followed by the level of authority that they hold[11]. For instance, the Crown court is required to deal with the prominent and very serious criminal issues, while on the other hand the High court is obliged to provide justice of various kind of cases which are associated with the civil matters and affairs.

The calls and decisions made by the higher courts have a high authority over the decision-making of the lower courts. As these courts are not very strictly required to make decisions which are associated with the expertise and the weight of the higher court judges. On the other hand, the judges of the lower courts are required to have solid reasoning over the decisions that they are making[12].

The relevance of the court hierarchy when associated with the Doctrine of binding precedent has underscored the structured approach of the English legal system which has created a much greater influence over the decision making process on the lower courts. The hierarchy ensures consistency in terms of the application of the legal principles which has ultimately contributes to the stability along with the predictability of the legal frameworks.

Arguments for Agreement with the Statement

At the identical time, the Doctrine of Restricting Point of reference is crucial to the English Overall set of felony guidelines and faces setting reactions that warrant cautious evaluation. One essential research spins spherical the obvious unbending nature and anxiety associated with sticking to a element of reference. Pundits contend that such excessive adherence also can disillusion the overall set of criminal recommendations’ capability to adjust to advancing cultural necessities. Even so, higher studies uncover the inborn adaptability within the Convention[13]. Courts have the region to recognize or overrule additives of reference on the identical time as conditions warrant, showing a powerful element that obliges impacting viewpoints.

One more association of reactions battles that the Doctrine ought to impede the conveyance of equity. Accordingly, it’s miles pivotal to recognize the Convention’s interest in ensuring consistency and equity underneath the normal gaze of the law. Occasions proliferate wherein adherence to the thing of reference continues valid dependability further to advances in reasonableness and fee. This nuanced assessment is critical for a much-enticing comprehension of the Regulation’s property and barriers inside the hard scene of the English Overall set of prison suggestions.

Pundits often degree the rate of unbending nature and firmness in the direction of the Tenet of Restricting Point of reference, placing ahead that it represses legitimate flexibility. Nonetheless, a nuanced evaluation uncovers that the Tenet typifies intrinsic adaptability. Inside its device, the prison authorities can recognize or overrule additives of reference at the equal time as justified via advancing cultural requirements or evolving conditions[14]. This versatility highlights the Convention’s responsiveness to provide-day characteristics, ensuring that lawful necessities line up with the perfect idea of society.

Also, the plain inflexibility is moderated via the criminal government’s interpretative interest. Courts can hire current-day, valid wonders to address elements of reference with developing requirements, finding some shape of harmony amongst soundness and versatility. The Teaching, in choice for an unbending draw close to of twenty-two scenarios, turns into a device for legitimate development, encouraging a framework which could solve sensibly transferring cultural requirements. Generally, the alleged firmness is a misrepresentation because of the reality the Regulation intrinsically obliges the requirement for valid sports activities and responsiveness, however, cultural alternate[15].

Flexibility within the Doctrine through distinguishing or overruling precedent

The Principle of Restricting Point of reference is well-known and shows critical adaptability through the additives of spotting and overruling trouble of reference. Recognizing reference components permits courts to apprehend the presence of advance selection while s declaring their disparities given verifiable or legitimate differentiations[16]. This method empowers a nuanced use of the reference factor, perceiving its pertinence even as obliging the unconventional conditions of each case. It is a practical tool for adjusting valid requirements to the information of growing times.

Also, the capability to overrule the issue of reference bears the charge of the prison government the potential to accurately obsolete or incorrect selections, ensuring the regulation stays receptive to present-day characteristics devices for lawful improvement, revising beyond confusion, and cultivating a framework that aligns with advancing cultural requirements. This capability to understand reference encefunctions is a purposeful adaptability in the Teaching, building up its flexibility and significance in exploring the intricacies of a commonly changing legitimate scene.

Role of the judiciary in ensuring adaptability to changing societal norms

The criminal authorities assume a crucial aspect in ensuring the capacity of the Regulation of Restricting Points of connection with converting cultural necessities. Judges, as mediators of the regulation, must use legitimate requirements to show contemporary dispositions and cultural movements. Through adroit translation and insightful reference elements, the crook government can perfectly embody advancing requirements into lawful options.

Legal picks, while established in the element of reference, aren’t restrained via verifiable unbending nature; all topics taken into consideration, they’ve got the scope to reflect the effective concept of society. By thinking of the greater considerable putting and cultural adjustments, the prison authorities will become an impetus for the Teaching’s responsiveness[17]. This interpretative interest skills the authorities to maintain fairness in a manner that strains up with contemporary-day elements of view, therefore assisting the energy of the Precept stiletto little-by-little little going embrittle going cultural nggoingulturalundamentally, the prison government is going approximately as an essential extension, interfacing laid-out lawful requirements with the growing upsides of most people it serves.

Because of reactions declaring that the Precept of Restricting Point of Reference impedes fairness, it’s far more crucial to feature the Convention’s substantial interest in ensuring consistency and uniformity underneath the constant gaze of the law. A prolonged way from discouraging equity, adherence to things of reference offers an established order to legitimate consistency, cultivating a framework in which humans are dealt with truthfully, given laid-out necessities[18].

The Tenant’s responsibility is consistently filling in as a guard in competition to erratic direction, advancing reasonableness inside the legitimate cycle. Occurrences proliferate in which adherence to the point of reference has been instrumental in maintaining consistency and forestalling crooked versions by laying out a shape of lawful consistency; this becomes a petition to anticipated inclination. It ensures that human beings are handled impartially within the conventional set of felony pointers. In this way, the apparent prevention of fairness is disproved by perceiving the Convention’s part in preserving a framework that focuses on correspondence and reasonableness for all.

Emphasis on the Doctrine’s role in ensuring consistency and equality before the law

Accentuating the Doctrine of Restricting Point of reference’s undertaking in ensuring consistency and stability beneath the watchful eye of the regulation is important for grasping its big effect on the general set of crook hints[19]. The Teaching lays out a shape that advances consistency in lawful alternatives, together with the steadiness and consistency of the valid scene. This responsibility to consistency fills in as a foundation for treating human beings pretty, no matter differing conditions.

By sticking to the factor of reference, the overall set of jail recommendations evades erratic and whimsical choices, cultivating a feeling of decency. It ensures that comparative instances are handled in masses in the same manner, forestalling treacherous versions and keeping the rule of thumb that the law wants to be finished reliably. The Convention, thus, becomes a tremendous asset in protecting the necessities of equality and justice — using a way of giving a reliable and uniform purpose for legitimate options, constructing up its easy pastime in maintaining an honest and impartial tremendous set of criminal guidelines[20].

Instances where adherence to precedent promotes fairness and equity

Examples proliferate wherein adherence to the Precept of Restricting Point of reference turns into an undaunted advertiser of decency and charge in the widespread set of legal hints. Consider conditions in which predictable use of elements of reference guarantees that comparable times are dealt with on par, laying out a feel of fairness under the watchful eye of the regulation. This is specifically clear in alternatives that incorporate essential freedoms or cultural necessities, in which the aspect of reference turns into a directing strength in preserving a sincere and unsurprising legitimate system.

Besides, the Regulation fills in as a remedial difficulty, forestalling the propagation of lawful errors or prejudicial practices. By relying on reference, an overall set of criminal hints can redress past treacheries and avoid inconsistent deviations laid out adherence to the element reference element sets an experience of valid fairness[21]. Further, it lets the public consider the legal govt, as people see a framework that reliably keeps reasonableness and price. Subsequently, the Regulation’s part in advancing these vital standards becomes apparent via its software in unambiguous examples in the lawful scene.

Case law examples and legislative provisions reinforcing the just application of the Doctrine

A few case regulation models and authoritative preparations spotlight the brilliant use of the Principle of Restricting Point of Reference in the fashionable tips. One convincing case is that of R v Brown (1993), wherein the Place of Masters caught the factor of reference set in Shaw v DPP (1962), keeping the rule that consent is, without a doubt, not a legitimate protection in instances of great massive damage. This steady use of the factor of reference confers legitimate consistency similar to a norm of fairness.

Authoritatively, the Basic Freedoms Act 1998 integrates the European Show on Common Liberties into UK law, stressing the meaning of the legitimate reference factor. This authoritative affiliation builds up the only utilization of the Teaching through adjusting homegrown regulation to growing clean freedoms necessities, embodying how lawful structures can adjust while keeping laid out requirements.

These models grandstand how the transaction among case law and regulation builds up the best use of the Tenet, making sure of agreeable incorporation of the trouble of reference with current lawful turns of activities.

Conclusion

Overall, the Doctrine of Restricting Point of reference, or gaze decisis, remains a foundation of the English Overall set of prison hints, forming the scene of legitimate translation and path. This coaching lies in its verifiable roots and further pragmatic ramifications for ensuring consistency, consistency, and effectiveness within the lawful tool.

The jail executive, in undertaking kinetically, passed judgment on filling in as translators of resolutions and precedeprecedingent-based competition requirements. Their optionally available powers in using components of reference reflect on consideration on a nuanced technique, considering pertinent case regulation and regulation. The courtroom docket order, in addition, impacts the Teaching, with picks restricting inner similar diplomas of court docket and better court docket alternatives conveying effective power. This various leveled shape makes a snare of lawful electricity that directs the constant utilization of factor of reference.

Supporting the articulation of the Tenet’s significance, the benefits are smooth. Sureness and consistency in the law offer a steady groundwork for legitimate choices, such as the productivity of prison cycles. Milestone instances and regulative preparations constitute the advantages of gaze decisis, displaying ip perseverance ing through significance.

Be that as it can, reactions against the Tenet cannot be omitted. Concerns About Aboutthethe, the unbending nature, and constraints in adjusting to cultural adjustments boost admirable statements. Adherence to ment may wreck equity, prompting low effects likely to feature the requirement for a sincere method.

In considering the persevering through because of these gaze decisions, it becomes clear that the whole time, not without blemishes, fills in as a key thing for valid dependability. The concord among points of reference and flexibility is vital, spotting the requirement for periodic reassessment and alternate. In a regular set of prison pointers that develops nearby cultural changes, gaze decision stays as an illustration of the fragile concord between custom and development, giving a structure that maintains fairness at the same time as adjusting to the powerful necessities of society. Finally,l in its capability to educate sessions on a few forms of harmony and maintain the trustworthiness of the English General set of criminal tips.

References

Bakar, A. and Nambiar, V.V., 2023. Precedent as a Source of Law. Issue 1 Indian JL & Legal Rsch., 5, p.1.https://almimbar.kuis.edu.my/index.php/almimbar/article/download/73/48

Anastasopoulos, G., 2023. Court of Justice of the European Union and General Court: Binding effect and relationship with the precedent vertical. Yearbook of European Union and Comparative Law, 1(1), pp.1-41.https://ejournals.epublishing.ekt.gr/index.php/yeucl/article/download/33015/25070

Curtis, C.J., 2024. Untwisting the Marks Rule and Plurality Precedent: Affirmances by Evenly Divided Courts and Theories of Holdings. Gonzaga Law Review, 59(1), pp.47-92.https://gonzaga-law-review.scholasticahq.com/article/92481.pdf

Nash, J.R., 2023. When Is Legal Methodology Binding?. Iowa Law Review, 109, p.24.https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/sites/ilr.law.uiowa.edu/files/2024-01/A5_Nash.pdf

Staszewski, G., 2023. A Deliberative Democratic Theory of Precedent. U. Colo. L. Rev., 94, p.1.https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=lawreview

Poupore, C., 2023. The Substantial Restraint Doctrine: A New Judiciary Standard of Analysis for Campaign Finance Disclosure.https://shareok.org/bitstream/handle/11244/337633/Poupore_URA_2023.pdf?sequence=1

Bradley, C.A. and Posner, E.A., 2023. The Real Political Question Doctrine. Stan. L. Rev., 75, p.1031.https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/05/Bradley-Posner-75-Stan.-L.-Rev.-1031.pdf

Miranda, J. and Sánchez Miranda, M., 2023. Chronicle of a crisis foretold: how the WTO Appellate Body drove itself into a corner. Journal of International Economic Law, 26(3), pp.435-461.https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/05/Bradley-Posner-75-Stan.-L.-Rev.-1031.pdf

Miranda, J. and Sánchez Miranda, M., 2023. Chronicle of a crisis foretold: how the WTO Appellate Body drove itself into a corner. Journal of International Economic Law, 26(3), pp.435-461.https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4841&context=wlulr

Pettibone, H., 2023. Major Problems with the Major Questions Doctrine: The Impact of West Virginia v. EPA on Environmental Regulations and Judicial Review.https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4472&context=cmc_theses

Noor, M., Hassan, A.M. and Ruskam, A., 2020. Application of the Doctrine of Binding Precedent in Malaysia: A Re-Evaluation. Journal of Politics and Law, 13(3)[22].https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6e56/3b879d6c09390ab8f81b159a0a4dfefd315c.pdf

Re, R.M., 2020. Precedent as Permission. Tex. L. Rev., 99, p.907. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/tlr99&section=33

Partington, M., 2021. Introduction to the English legal system. Oxford University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=o-krEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Importance+of+the+Doctrine+in+the+English+Legal+System&ots=vbYjyx-IaT&sig=se9cOCuBu5cJtArVvXG55BzJb6w

McLeod, I., 2020. Legal method.Bloomsbury Publishing. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=so5KEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=Importance+of+the+Doctrine+in+the+English+Legal+System&ots=1N1C6WkpCy&sig=zf3hfj76MKAlVvyVKgS4SUKFMPc

Spano, R., 2021. The rule of law as the lodestar of the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court and the independence of the judiciary. European Law Journal, 27(1-3), pp.211-227. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/eulj.12377

Batyrbaev, B., Aidarbekova, G., Toktombaeva, A., Salybekova, T., Ganieva, T., Gulsara, K. and Abdullaeva, Z., 2021. Legal Policy and Legal Culture in the System for Public Administration and Judiciary in the Kyrgyz Republic. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9(7), pp.53-61. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=110533

Nalyvaiko, L. and Chepik-Trehubenko, O., 2023. Application of the principle of the rule of law in international and national courts. Щорічник, p.143. https://nals.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/shhorichnyk_ukr_prava-2023.pdf#page=143

Leszczyński, L., 2020. Extra-legal values in judicial interpretation of law: a model reasoning and few examples. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 33(4), pp.1073-1087. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11196-020-09773-y

Neo, J.L., 2020. A Contextual Approach to Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments: Judicial Power and the Basic Structure Doctrine in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 15(1).https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/asian-journal-of-comparative-law/article/contextual-approach-to-unconstitutional-constitutional-amendments-judicial-power-and-the-basic-structure-doctrine-in-malaysia/8F559E8EC69189C4AF1998C7D8050862

Deacon, D.T. and Litman, L.M., 2023. The new major questions doctrine. Va. L. Rev., 109, p.1009. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/valr109&section=29

Strickson, B. and De La Iglesia, B., 2020, March. Legal judgement prediction for uk courts. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Information Science and Systems (pp. 204-209). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3388176.3388183

Wilson, S., Rutherford, H., Storey, T., Wortley, N. and Kotecha, B., 2020. English legal system. Oxford University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jcXnDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Explanation+of+court+hierarchy+in+the+English+Legal+System&ots=opyYIYL8Ty&sig=_YyRxfzbyEgfSJALSKPrCgkm3Ik

[1] Noor, M., Hassan, A.M. and Ruskam, A., 2020. Application of the Doctrine of Binding Precedent in Malaysia: A Re-Evaluation. Journal of Politics and Law, 13(3)

[2] Re, R.M., 2020. Precedent as Permission. Tex. L. Rev., 99, p.907.

[3] Partington, M., 2021. Introduction to the English legal system. Oxford University Press.

[4] McLeod, I., 2020. Legal method.Bloomsbury Publishing.

[5] Spano, R., 2021. The rule of law as the lodestar of the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court and the independence of the judiciary. European Law Journal, 27(1-3), pp.211-227.

[6] Batyrbaev, B., Aidarbekova, G., Toktombaeva, A., Salybekova, T., Ganieva, T., Gulsara, K. and Abdullaeva, Z., 2021. Legal Policy and Legal Culture in the System for Public Administration and Judiciary in the Kyrgyz Republic. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9(7), pp.53-61.

[7] Nalyvaiko, L. and Chepik-Trehubenko, O., 2023. Application of the principle of the rule of law in international and national courts. Щорічник, p.143.

[8] Leszczyński, L., 2020. Extra-legal values in judicial interpretation of law: a model reasoning and few examples. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 33(4), pp.1073-1087

[9] Wilson, S., Rutherford, H., Storey, T., Wortley, N. and Kotecha, B., 2020. English legal system. Oxford University Press.

[10] Strickson, B. and De La Iglesia, B., 2020, March. Legal judgement prediction for uk courts. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Information Science and Systems (pp. 204-209).

[11] Neo, J.L., 2020. A Contextual Approach to Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments: Judicial Power and the Basic Structure Doctrine in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 15(1).

[12] Deacon, D.T. and Litman, L.M., 2023. The new major questions doctrine. Va. L. Rev., 109, p.1009.

[13] Bakar, A. and Nambiar, V.V., 2023. Precedent as a Source of Law. Issue 1 Indian JL & Legal Rsch., 5, p.1

[14] Anastasopoulos, G., 2023. Court of Justice of the European Union and General Court: Binding effect and relationship with the precedent vertical. Yearbook of European Union and Comparative Law, 1(1), pp.1-41

[15] Curtis, C.J., 2024. Untwisting the Marks Rule and Plurality Precedent: Affirmances by Evenly Divided Courts and Theories of Holdings. Gonzaga Law Review, 59(1), pp.47-92

[16] Nash, J.R., 2023. When Is Legal Methodology Binding?. Iowa Law Review, 109, p.24

[17] Staszewski, G., 2023. A Deliberative Democratic Theory of Precedent. U. Colo. L. Rev., 94, p.1

[18] Poupore, C., 2023. The Substantial Restraint Doctrine: A New Judiciary Standard of Analysis for Campaign Finance Disclosure

[19] Bradley, C.A. and Posner, E.A., 2023. The Real Political Question Doctrine. Stan. L. Rev., 75, p.1031

[20] Miranda, J. and Sánchez Miranda, M., 2023. Chronicle of a crisis foretold: how the WTO Appellate Body drove itself into a corner. Journal of International Economic Law, 26(3), pp.435-461.

[21] Pettibone, H., 2023. Major Problems with the Major Questions Doctrine: The Impact of West Virginia v. EPA on Environmental Regulations and Judicial Review.