The first advantage of judicial precedent is certainty; this means the lawyers are able to predict the outcome of the case due to Judges following the same rules and the same Ratios this is a good thing as it means Lawyers could prepare clients for the worse or the best to the best of their ability, and this could save time and money as well. Sir Rupert Cross-Doctrine of precedent has a particular emphasis on rigidity and certainty. Another advantage is flexibility; the law is able to develop in ways that reflect social and technological circumstances and does not have to wait for the permission from Parliament, it also allows the common law system to respond to new situations like in Mcloughlin O’Brien’s case where the Supreme Court extended the law on nervous shock to cover new situations within the case. Consistency, this means that similar cases are dealt with in the same way, and this makes the law fair and credible and makes our legal system respected in other countries.
Another would be its real and reals with real life situations, case laws deal with situations that arise in practice – real facts in real situations – unlike statues and if an unforeseen situation arises, judges can refer to existing precedents and adapt the law to meet the new situation. Another advantage would be Original precedents, this allows for new or original precedents to be created and this occurs when there is no previous decision on the matter or case and this therefore means an original precedent therefore makes legal provision on a matter for which there was no previously no. In Gillick V West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority the House of Lords had to decide whether or not girls under 16 could be prescribed contraceptives without parental consent. This matter had not arisen before the courts before, and parliament had provided no guidance.