Balancing Legal Consistency with the Precedent Guidance of the High Court of Australia

Abstract

This study examines the principle of legal consistency within the Australian legal system, emphasizing the High Court of Australia’s (HCA) guidance on precedent in landmark cases such as Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd. The primary objective is to evaluate how adherence to precedent fosters legal uniformity, predictability, and fairness. A qualitative analysis of landmark judgments and doctrinal reviews forms the basis of this research. It explores the influence of precedent on lower courts' decision-making, particularly in cases involving jurisdictional overlaps. The findings reveal that while the doctrine of precedent ensures coherence in legal interpretations, challenges emerge when intermediate appellate courts face divergent rulings. These challenges highlight the tension between strict adherence to precedent and the need for flexibility. The study underscores the necessity for the HCA’s directives to balance deference with adaptability across jurisdictions. This balance is vital for maintaining judicial consistency and reinforcing the stability and credibility of Australia's legal framework. The research concludes that the doctrine of precedent, guided by the HCA, is crucial for sustaining a coherent legal system. However, addressing the challenges of jurisdictional diversity is essential for long-term judicial effectiveness.