What are the potential consequences of judges being too willing to depart from binding precedent?

The doctrine of binding precedent states that all courts bind all lower courts, and some courts also bind themselves. Apr 3, 2024 ... In brief. Recently, Labor Inspection Court established an administrative precedent of mandatory observance in relation to the transfer of ... Feb 1, 2023 ... ... binding precedent for lower courts. Whether language in an appellate opinion was central to the decision or only an afterthought, zealous ... Furthermore, and again with the sole exception of the United States, no member of the WTO questions that the binding dispute settlement system with the ... Binding precedent is “[a] precedent that the court must follow,” while persuasive precedent is “[a] precedent that a court may either follow or reject, but ... The beginning of wisdom may be to recognize the variety of problems that arise in common law systems concerning application of precedents. Aug 9, 2022 ... Hence, the defining principle of common law is precedents, which is the requirement that judges must follow binding legal decisions of prior ... Under stare decisis, courts are obliged to follow some precedents, but not others. Because of the many layers of our federal system, it can be difficult to ... Under Rule 33(a) of the Georgia Court of Appeals, a decision by a three-judge panel is “physical precedent only” with respect to any part of the opinion in ... Binding precedent. Precedent that a court must abide by in its adjudication of a case. For example, a lower court is bound by the decision of a higher ...