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
Publications récentes
-
Du cas à l’affaire Caster Semenya : (en)cadrer la question de l’égalité des sexes
Isabelle Rorive a participé au dossier thématique Droit genre et sport publié dans le deuxième numéro d’Intersections – Revue semestrielle… -
Le droit à l’intégrité corporelle des personnes intersexuées
Dans l’ouvrage Les droits des personnes intersexes (Larcier-Intersentia, 2024), Charly Derave, Marie Goffaux, Anne-Catherine Rasson et Isabelle Rorive ont rédigé… -
From Blueprint to Reality: Implementing AI Regulatory Sandboxes under the AI Act
Nathan Genicot has written a report on the legal framework for AI regulatory sandboxes under the AI Act. AI regulatory sandboxes… -
Séminaire Perelman exceptionnel. De l’espace global aux agrégats transactionnels. Sur la fragmentation et la…
Le 23 octobre 2024, le Centre Perelman et IHEB a organisé un séminaire exceptionnel du Professeur Karim Benyekhlef de l’Université…