i) Judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis: this doctrine states that previous judicial decisions are binding on a judge who seeks to give judgment on a similar case, especially at the lower court. Judicial precedent is a result of case law and is the application of previous rulings or decisions or judgments of the court of law on a point of law in a legal dispute. It is based on the underlying principle of consistency and fairness so that judgments, decisions, and orders of the court or adjudicating bodies must follow precedent. The doctrine of judicial precedent means that a judge is bound to apply a decision from an earlier case to the facts of the case before him, provided, among other conditions, that there is no material difference between the cases on hand and the previous case. In accordance with Article 129 (2) of the 1992 Constitution, the Supreme Court shall not be bound to follow decisions of any other court. Lower courts in adjudicating a case before them must however apply a ‘binding’ precedent developed by a Superior Court. The Supreme Court may review, vary, or overturn any earlier decision made by any court, including its own decision as per Article 133 (1)(2) of the 1992 Constitution.

ii) Rules used in interpreting Statute:

1. The Golden Rule: This rule allows a judge to depart from a word’s normal meaning to avoid an absurd result.
2. The Mischief Rule: This rule interprets a statute with a focus on remedying the mischief that the statute is intended to prevent.
3. The Literal Rule: This rule interprets the statute based on the plain and literal meaning of the words used.
4. The Ejusdem Generis Rule: This rule is used when a general term follows a list of specific terms; the general term is interpreted to include only items of the same type as those listed.

(Any 2 points @ 2 marks each = 4 marks)