According to the conventional view, the attitude towards precedent is one of the most important differences between common law and civil law systems. This paper argues that the phenomenon of overruling as practised both by the Belgian Cour de cassation and the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords casts doubt on the cogency of such a perception. As a matter of fact, the Belgian and English systems exhibit a very similar jurisprudence with respect to departure from existing case law as practised at the highest level in the judiciary. This approach challenges the appearance that formal definitions provide for the difference in attitude towards precedent between the two countries and more broadly between common law and civil law systems, without denying the existence of a distinctive legal culture.
Accueil >
Diverging Legal Traditions But Similar Jurisprudence of Overuling : The Case of the House of Lords and the Belgian Cour de Cassation
![arton1441-2885d.jpg](https://centreperelman.be//content/uploads/2022/08/arton1441-2885d-100x149.jpg)
Publications récentes
-
La valeur fondamentale de l’égalité des genres comme motif de protection internationale – analyse…
Par Hania Ouhnaoui, assistante chargée d’exercices pour l’Equality Law Clinic et Sarah Bertholet, stagiaire pour l’Equality Law Clinic[1]. Le 11 juin… -
Obligations positives face aux violences sexuelles et sexistes
Isabelle Rorive a contribué au premier numéro d’Intersections. Revue semestrielle Genre& Droit. Elle a participé à la chronique « Discriminations, Inégalités… -
L’affaire Caster Semenya
Le 26 juin, Isabelle Rorive était l’invitée d’Antoine Garapon dans l’émission « Esprit de justice » de France Culture pour discuter de… -
Portrait de Chaïm Perelman par Benoit Frydman
L’Association Internationale de Méthodologie Juridique (AIMJ) publie un portrait de Chaïm Perelman par Benoit Frydman https://aimj.ca/portraits-de-chercheurs/…