Abstract

This paper aims to analyze the issues concerning the implementation of binding precedent in Malaysian cases, and propose a re-evaluation of the binding precedent doctrine. The qualitative approach was employed to indicate the issues related to the doctrine of binding precedent by analyzing relevant cases. These cases were selected to propose the re-evaluation of the binding precedent doctrine as practiced by the Malaysian dual-judicial system. The main issue to be discussed regarding the doctrine of binding precedent is interference by the Civil Court on Islamic matters and Syariah Court decisions, which lead to inconsistency in judgments, even after the amendment of Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution. This study proposes that the application of binding precedent should be re-evaluated to ensure that the principles of justice are upheld. Court judges should decide cases based on merit, and only use previous judgments as guidance for present and future cases.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.