1) “Precedent is a case which serves an authority for legal principle embodied in its decision.

A
case is only an authority for what it actually decides” Hon. Mr. Justice Tsekooko in Charles
Onyango Obbo in Andrew Mujuni Mwenda V The Attorney General in a Supreme Court
Constitutional Appeal N0.2 of 2002. Discuss
Approach
Define a Precedent
Give courts, which make binding precedents (Courts of Record)
Give the types of precedents
Define them each
Give case law applied in each precedent
A precedent is a ruling of a superior court, which is bonding to an inferior court.
Black’s law dictionary defines precedents as decided case that furnishes a basis for determining
later cases involving similar facts or issues. The rule of adhering to judicial judgment finds its
expression in the doctrine of stare decisis, Latin-meaning stand by the things decided. The doctrine
simply means that ‘when a point or principle of law has been once officially decided or settled by
the ruling of a competent court in a case in which it is directly and necessarily involved, it will no
longer be open to examination or to a new ruling by the same tribunal or by those which are
bound to follow its adjudications, unless it be for urgent reasons and in exceptional cases.

This applies to the court of records to the sub-ordinate courts. Courts of records are provided for in
Article 129 of the 1995 constitution of Uganda as amended. The inferior courts follow the
precedents of the superior courts therefore the judgements of the High Court are not binding on the
superior court.
In law, a precedent is an adjudged case or decision of a court of justice, considered as furnishing a
rule or authority for the determination of an identical or similar case afterwards arising, or of a
similar question of law. The only theory on which it is possible for one decision to be an authority for
another is that the facts are alike, or, if the facts are different, that the principle which governed the
first case is applicable to the variant facts”
This doctrine dictates that all cases in which the material facts are similar should be decided in a
similar way for purposes of consistency and saving time.
K. Makubuya opines that the doctrine of precedent requires that a court should follow the rules
and principles established in earlier decisions when deciding subsequent cases. That subordinate
courts in the court hierarchy do decide causes and matters in accordance with earlier decisions, if
any, of courts superior in hierarchy. The ratio decidendi of a case is deemed binding.
Art 132 (4) The Supreme Court may, while treating its own previous decisions as normally
binding, depart from a previous decision when it appears to it right to do so; and all other courts
shall be bound to follow the decisions of the Supreme Court on questions of law.
Types
Binding and Authoritative precedents
 Binding precedent. A precedent that a court must follow.• For example, a lower court is bound
by an applicable holding of a higher court in the same jurisdiction. - Also termed authoritative
precedent; binding authority
There are only two ways in which one can escape from the authoritative precedents
1) Distinguishing
2) The precedent might have ignored the law (per in curium)

Persuasive precedent. (1905)

A precedent that is not binding on a court, but that is entitled to respect and careful consideration .• For
example, if the case was decided in a neighboring jurisdiction, the court might evaluate the earlier
court's reasoning without being bound to decide the same way
Declaratory precedent.
A precedent that is merely the application of an already existing legal rule.
Original precedent. A precedent that creates and applies a new legal rule.