by 112-1077774096 » Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:47 am
It says it is not easy to question them, that does not mean that you can not question them. the problem is when precedents have been set the court will normally follow them. you have laws and through the year judges have convicted or not convicted based on certain points, these then set precedents which the law generally follows, however a good enough argument could then set a new precedent if a judge was to find in your favour.
As an example a Barrister may argue that a chain of causation was broken at a certain point, if the judge agrees generally other judges will follow this allowing a Barrister in court to use it in future cases where he has the same situation, he will state the case and the judgement where the decision was made and the following judge normally follows it.