Keywords
Argentinian Supreme Court
Categories
How to Cite
Abstract
This paper studies the horizontal stare decisis. First, it examines the horizontal stare decisis in the common law system and concludes that, following the particular judicial opinion of Justice Brandeis in Burnet v. Colorado Oil: i) the horizontal stare decisis is not a mandatory juridical rule; ii) in constitutional cases the horizontal stare decisis is even less stronger. In the second part, the paper compares those conclusions with the Argentinian Supreme Court case law. The author argues that the Argentinian case law is erratic: sometimes the Court has followed its own prior precedents, but in other cases the Court has not followed them, without giving a specific argument. He concludes that there is no horizontal stare decisis in the Argentinian Supreme Court, although is possible to find some exceptions.
References
CHAMBERLAIN, D.H, “The Doctrine of Stare Decisis as applied to Decisions of Constitutional Questions”, in Harvard Law Review, vol. 3, Nº 3, Massachusetts, Cambridge, 1889.
CROSS, Rupert & HARRIS, Jim W., Precedent in English Law, 4ª ed., Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1991.
CUETO RÚA, Julio César, El Common Law, Buenos Aires, Abeledo-Perrot, 1997 (reimpresión de la edición de 1957, publicada por editorial La Ley).
ELIAS, José Sebastián, “Massa y la saga de la ‘pesificación’: lo bueno, lo malo y lo feo”, en Jurisprudencia Argentina, Suplemento de Jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, 30 de abril de 2008, LexisNexis, Buenos Aires, tomo 2008-II-1326.
GARAY, Alberto F. “El precedente judicial en la Corte Suprema”, en Revista Jurídica de la Universidad de Palermo, año 2, vol. 1, Nºs 1 y 2, Buenos Aires, 1997.
GARAY, Alberto F., “El valor de los precedentes de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación en la Argentina”, en Daniel A. Sabsay y Pablo L. Manili, Constitución de la Nación Argentina y normas complementarias. Análisis doctrinal y jurisprudencial, Buenos Aires, Editorial Hammurabi, 2010.
GARAY, Alberto F. La doctrina del precedente en la Corte Suprema, Buenos Aires, Abeledo Perrot, 2013.
GARGARELLA, Roberto, “In Search of a Democratic Justice–What Courts Should not Do: Argentina, 1983-2002”, in Roberto Gargarella, Democratization and the Judiciary, London, Frank Cass, 2005.
GELLI, María Angélica, Constitución de la Nación Argentina comentada, 2ª ed., Buenos Aires, La Ley, 2003.
GOODHART, Arthur L. “Case Law in England and America”, in Cornell Law Quarterly, vol. 15, New York, 1930.
GOTTHEIL, Julio, Common Law y Civil Law, Buenos Aires, Abeledo-Perrot, 1960.
HART, H.L.A., The Concept of Law, 2ª ed., Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1994.
KOZEL, Randy, “Settled Versus Right: Constitutional Method and the Path of Precedent”, in Texas Law Review, vol. 91, Nº 7, Texas, 2013.
LEGARRE, Santiago y RIVERA, Julio César, “Naturaleza y dimensiones del stare decisis”, en Revista Chilena de Derecho, vol. 33, Nº 1, Santiago, 2006.
LEGARRE, Santiago, “Redescubriendo el quórum en la Corte Suprema: la ley 27 y su antecedente estadounidense”, en Revista de Historia del Derecho, vol. 36, Buenos Aires, 2008.
LEGARRE, Santiago y Julio César Rivera, “La obligatoriedad atenuada de los fallos de la Corte Suprema y el stare decisis vertical”, en Revista Jurídica la Ley, Nº 4, Buenos Aires, 2009.
LEGARRE, Santiago, “La Corte, las drogas y una mayoría dudosa”, en Revista de Derecho de Familia y de las Personas, Nº 1, Buenos Aires, 2009.
LEGARRE, Santiago, “Precedent in Argentine Law”, in Loyola Law Review, vol. 57, Nº 4, New Orleans, 2011.
MOSCHZISKER, Robert, “Stare Decisis in Courts of Last Resort”, in Harvard Law Review, vol. 37, Harvard, 1924.
SAGÜÉS, Néstor P., Derecho Procesal Constitucional. Recurso extraordinario, 4ª ed., Buenos Aires, Astrea, 2002, tomo 1.
Attribution 4.0 International CC BY 4.0
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.