WRITING CASENOTES

Essentially, a casenote is a summary of a case. Christopher Enright,

1
as
outlined below, suggests the type of information that should be included in
any case summary. You may wish to use these points as a guide to writing
your own casenote:
Formal particulars, including:
o The name and citation of the case (ie Mabo v Queensland
(o.!" (1##!" 1$% C&' 1",
o ame of the court and (udge(s",
o ame and status of each party, and
o )ate of the (udgment*
The facts of the case*
The prior history of the case in lower courts (if mentioned in the
(udgment"*
The cause of action or claim in+ol+ed in the case (for e,ample, the
issue on appeal"*
- summary of the (udgments, including any dissenting (udgments,
which should include:
o The facts that were considered material or rele+ant,
o The ratio decidendi,
o The arguments considered by the court in support of, or
against, the principle, and
o -ny obiter dicta or signi.cant obser+ations by the court*
Commentary on the impact of the decision on the law.
The following pages contain an e,ample of how a casenote can be
presented, as well as a discussion on reading and summarising cases by
'ichard /re+er.
1
Enright C., Studying Law, 5
th
edn., Federation Press, 1995, pp.461-462.
Casenote example (please note that this is only a suggested
format!
Penfold Wines Pty Ltd v Elliott (1946) 74 CLR 204
Date of Judgment 25 !o"em#er 1946
F$C%&
Penfo'ds (ines Pt) *imited +,Penfo'ds,- .as a .ine produ/er and se''er. E''iott .as
a 'i/ensed hote'ier /arr)ing on #usiness at an hote' in !&(. %hrough em#ossing on
their #ott'es and notations on their in"oi/es Penfo'ds informed a'' those in possession
of its #ott'es that the) .ere to #e used on') for the purposes of retai'ing and
/onsumption of Penfo'd0s .ines and further, that the) a'.a)s remained the propert)
of Penfo'ds.
Penfo'ds asserted that E''iott, .ithout its /onsent, had #een re/ei"ing, /o''e/ting and
hand'ing their em#ossed #ott'es, using them in /onne/tion .ith his #usiness and
de'i"ering to his /ustomers 'i1uids not manufa/tured or mar2eted #) Penfo'ds.
Penfo'ds sought an in3un/tion to ha"e the pra/ti/e stopped.
%45$* J6D7E0& DEC5&58!
$t the tria', !i/ho'as CJ found that
+a- E''iott fi''ed t.o of Penfo'ds0 #ott'es .ith .ine other than Penfo'ds0 .ine and
de'i"ered them to 9oon for a sum of : shi''ings. %he #ott'es .ere not so'd to
9oon.
+#- E''iott had for )ears and on/e su#se1uent') fi''ed Penfo'ds0 #ott'es .ith non
Penfo'ds0 .ine. %.o of these fi''ed #ott'es .ere de'i"ered to E''iott0s #rother.
+/- E''iott did not se'' Penfo'ds0 #ott'es.
Penfo'ds asserted that
+1- E''iott0s a/ti"ities des/ri#ed in +a- a#o"e in"o'"ed an assumption of
dominion o"er the #ott'es .hi/h amounted to /on"ersion, and
+2- E''iott0s a/ti"ities des/ri#ed in +#- a#o"e amounted to a use of the #ott'es
in/onsistent .ith the terms of de'i"er) of the #ott'es.
%he tria' 3udge found that E''iott0s /ondu/t amounted to a trespass to goods. ;is
honour refused to order an in3un/tion #e/ause there .as inade1uate e"iden/e that
E''iott intended to se'' the #ott'es or to 2eep them if as2ed #) Penfo'ds to return them.
5&&6E<& 8! $PPE$*
Penfo'ds appea'ed to the ;igh Court see2ing an in3un/tion.
%;E ;57; C864%
%he ;igh Court /omprised *atham CJ, &tar2e, Di=on, 9/%iernan and (i''iams JJ.
Latham CJ
Penfo'ds0 #randed #ott'es .ere #ai'ed to persons .ho re/ei"ed them. >) the terms of
the #ai'ment, the #ai'ee .as not entit'ed to use the #ott'es for another purpose than
on/e on') for retai'ing, /onsuming or using the p'aintiff0s .ine /ontained in the
#ott'es, and su/h a person has no right to authorise an) other person to use them for
an) other purpose +at 21?-. $ #ai'ment is determined #) an) a/t of the #ai'ee .hi/h
is .ho'') repugnant to the ho'ding as #ai'ee, and at that point the #ai'or has an
immediate right to possession. %he de'i"er) of #ott'es #) E''iott0s #rother to E''iott to
ha"e them fi''ed .ith .ine other than Penfo'ds0 .as in #rea/h of the e=press terms of
the #ai'ment. %his ended the #ai'ment and Penfo'ds as #ai'or a/1uired an immediate
right to possession of the #ott'es +at 214-.
$ mere ta2ing or asportation of a /hatte' ma) #e a trespass .ithout the inf'i/tion of
an) materia' damage. %he hand'ing of a /hatte' .ithout authorit) is a trespass.
6nauthorised user of goods is a trespass, eg using a #ott'e. %he norma' use of a #ott'e
is as a /ontainer, and the use of it for this purpose is a trespass if it is not authorised
#) a person in possession or entit'ed to immediate possession.
$s E''iott o#tained the #ott'es from his #rother .ith the 'atter0s authorit) then there
/an #e no trespass against his #rother. @;is honour then e=amines authorities that
/ontend that a p'aintiff suing in trespass must ha"e #een in possession of the goods at
the time of the trespass, e=/ept .here the trespass .as against the p'aintiffAs ser"ant,
agent or #ai'ee under a re"o/a#'e #ai'ment.B
%he possession of a ser"ant is the possession of their masterC the possession of an
agent is the possession of their prin/ipa'. 5n neither /ase is it ,another0s possession,.
%herefore, ea/h is regarded as ha"ing a/tua' possession +at 216-. 5n re'ation to a
re"o/a#'e #ai'ment, the #ai'or has neither possession nor an immediate right to
possession so 'ong as the #ai'ment remains unre"o2ed. 5f the possession of a #ai'ee
ho'ding under su/h a #ai'ment is "io'ated it is the #ai'ee0s possession and not that of
the #ai'or .hi/h is "io'ated. ;en/e, if the #ai'or ma) sue for trespass, then the #ai'or
is suing for a "io'ation to another0s possession.
5n this /ase the #ai'ment e=pired .hen #rought #) E''iott0s #rother to E''iot to #e
fi''ed .ith .ine other than Penfo'ds0. Penfo'ds then #e/ame immediate') entit'ed to
possession of the #ott'es. %herefore, Penfo'ds /ou'd sue in trespass a'though 'ogi/a'
argument tended against this "ie..
%he use of the #ott'es #) E''iott .ithout an) regard for Penfo'ds0 rights for the #enefit
of E''iott and his #rother .as a /on"ersion +at 21:-. $'so, E''iott dea't .ith the
#ott'es as #eing a person entit'ed to dispose of them to 9oon, su/h a disposition
#eing a /on"ersion.
;is honour ordered an in3un/tion restraining E''iott from using Penfo'ds0 #ott'es for
an) purpose other than that of /ontaining 'i1uids manufa/tured or p'a/ed there #)
Penfo'ds.
Starke J
;is honour found that trespass did not 'ie #ut found /on"ersion of Penfo'd0s #ott'es.
$s E''iott0s fi''ing of the #ott'es .as not a s)stemati/ pra/ti/e then Penfo'ds ought to
#e 'eft to their /ommon 'a. remedies of damages and an in3un/tion ought not #e
a.arded.
Dixon J
%he fa/ts re"ea' no trespass #e/ause there is, on E''iott0s part, no infringement of
another0s possession +at 224-.
$n immediate right to possession is insuffi/ient to support an a/tion in trespass. 5f it
.ere suffi/ient then /on"ersion .ou'd ha"e #een an unne/essar) remed). %he /orre/t
"ie. is that the right to possession as entit'ement for suing in trespass is mere') a
right in one person to sue for a trespass done to another0s possession and this right
e=ists .hene"er the person .hose a/tua' possession .as "io'ated he'd as ser"ant,
agent or #ai'ee under a re"o/a#'e #ai'ment for or on #eha'f of the person ha"ing the
right to possession +at 22D-.
%he determination of the #ai'ment ma) ena#'e the #ai'or to sue in /on"ersion or
detinue #ut not in trespass. &u/h determination re"ests the #ai'or0s right to possession
and therefore the #ai'or0s immediate right to sue in /on"ersion or detinue +at 22D-.
%here is no /on"ersion #e/ause on E''iott0s part, there is no a/t and no intent
in/onsistent .ith Penfo'ds0 rights to possession +at 224-. %he essen/e of /on"ersion is
a dea'ing .ith a /hatte' in a manner repugnant to the immediate right of possession of
the person .ho o.ns the goods. 6se of a /hatte' is not /on"ersion. $n intent to do
that .hi/h .ou'd depri"e the ,true o.ner, of their immediate right to possession or
impair it is the essentia' #asis of /on"ersion +at 229-. %he re-de'i"er) #) E''iott of
fi''ed #ott'es to those .ho 'eft them .ith him to #e fi''ed in"o'"ed a transfer of
possession #ut not for the purpose of /onferring an) right o"er the propert) in the
#ott'es.
;is honour found that there .as no #asis for an in3un/tion.
McTiernan J
;is honour /on/'udes that the on') .rong /ommitted #) E''iott is a /on"ersion of t.o
of Penfo'ds0 #ott'es and that the /ase is not a proper one for an in3un/tion +at 2?2-.
Wiiam! J
%here .as no "io'ation #) E''iott of his #rother0s possession of the #ott'es. %here .as
therefore no asportation of the #ott'es from the person in a/tua' possession and so
Penfo'ds ha"e no /ase against E''iott in trespass +at 242-.
For E''iott to fi'' the #ott'es as he did 2no.ing that the) .ere the propert) of Penfo'ds
amounted to a /on"ersion +at 24?-.
;is honour granted an in3un/tion.
86%C89E 8F %;E $PPE$*
%respass .as found on') #) *atham CJ.
Con"ersion .as found #) a'' e=/ept Di=on J.
%he appea' .as dismissed #) &tar2e, Di=on and 9/%ieman JJ. %he appea' .as
a''o.ed #) *atham CJ and (i''iams J.
59P$C% 8! C644E!% *$(
%he ma3orit) de/ision in Penfo'ds affirmed that on') a person in possession /an sue
for trespass e=/ept .here that person is the #ai'or, master or prin/ipa' of a person
.ho, ha"ing suffered a "io'ation of a/tua' possession, .as a #ai'ee under a re"o/a#'e
#ai'ment or ser"ant or agent of the former. Further, an un3ustified use of goods .i''
amount to a /on"ersion pro"ided there is an intention to e=er/ise dominion o"er
them.
%he /ase is unfortunate in that there is /onf'i/t #et.een opinions supporting an order.
$s su/h, its 3udi/ia' for/e ma) #e diminished as it is diffi/u't to distinguish ratio from
o#iter see Paton 7( and &a.er 7 ,4atio De/idendi and 8#iter Di/tum in $ppe''ate
Courts, @194DB 6? *E4 461.
The e,tract from /re+er on the following page gi+es a useful introduction
on how to read and summarise cases 0 what to loo1 for and what to a+oid.
Rea"in# an" S$mmari!in# Ca!e!
2
4i/hard Fre"er
*a. students /an usua'') s2ip o"er the first step in finding the /ommon 'a., that is,
unearthing the re'e"ant /ases. 5n most /ourses the instru/tor or /ase#oo2 editor .i'' ha"e
a'read) assem#'ed those /ases for )ou. Gour first tas2, then, is to prepare a prH/is of a /ase,
that is, a short summar) of the fa/ts and ho'ding, setting out the ru'e of 'a. esta#'ished #) the
pre/edent. %he prH/is .i'' #e the #ui'ding #'o/2 from .hi/h )ou .i'' /onstru/t or neutra'ise
arguments that /an #e #ased on that pre/edent. $s su/h, it shou'd /ontain .hate"er
information is needed to app') or distinguish the ho'ding in future ana'ogous situations.
Determinin# the Context o% the Deci!ion
%he initia' step to understanding the re'e"an/e of a 'a. report is to as/ertain .ho is suing
.hom for .hat. $'though this introdu/tor) step sounds 'i2e an eas) me/hani/a' e=er/ise,
often as not it re1uires a 'itt'e dete/ti"e .or2.
%he /ases )ou read are appe''ate de/isions on 1uestions of 'a.. +5n some 3urisdi/tions first
instan/e de/isions are reported I these, ho.e"er, are the e=/eption, not the ru'e.- %he 3udges
gi"ing the de/ision ha"e heard /ounse' for the parties e=p'ain in great detai' the fa/ts gi"ing
rise to the dispute, the pro/ession of hearings and 'ega' e"ents prior to tria' and, often, detai's
of the origina' tria' itse'f. %he appe''ate 3udges then de'i"er an opinion on their interpretation
of a point of 'a. .ithout ne/essari') setting out a'' this #a/2ground /onte=t /'ear'). 5t is
important that )ou /arefu'') read a de/ision to dra. out this information. Gou /annot
understand the-re'e"an/e of a 3udgment I .here it shou'd #e app'ied and .here it /an #e
distinguished I un'ess )ou understand the fa/tua' #asis for the /ase.
%he more times a de/ision is appea'ed, the further /omp'i/ated the tas2 #e/omes. 5n some
3urisdi/tions the names of the parties re"erse as one part) and then the other appea's I Smith
v Jones #e/omes Jones v Smith .hen 9r Jones appea's and then re"erts to Smith v Jones
.hen 9s &mith appea's from that de/ision. 5n other 3urisdi/tions, the order of names remains
the same a'' the .a) up. &ome parties ha"e #een 3oined to the a/tion #) an origina' part) and
appear as 0third parties0. $nd sometimes parties are added or dropped at "arious appea's. $/me
Pt) *td ma) 'ose a /ase against the Common.ea'th of $ustra'ia on /onstitutiona' grounds #ut
#e 3oined #) the &tates of Ji/toria and Eueens'and as inter"eners .hen the /ase is appea'ed if
those &tates see their po.ers threatened #) the origina' de/ision. %he 'a#e's atta/hed to the
"arious parties /hange, too, as de/isions pro/eed through the /ourts. P'aintiffs and defendants
ma) #e/ome appe''ants, app'i/ants or respondents. %o /omp'i/ate matters further, 3udges .i''
usua'') refer to parties #) their 3udi/ia' 'a#e's +appe''ant, p'aintiff, et/-, not their rea' names.
2
Fre"er, 4., Mastering Law Studies and Law Exam Techinques, 5
th
edn., >utter.orths, 2KK1, pp. 1?-22
$nd to top it off, the) .i'' do so in/onsistent') I one 3udge might spea2 of the appe''ant
.hi'e another refers to the same part) as the p'aintiff, his status in the /ourt #e'o..
%he ne=t step after determining .hi/h part) is suing .hi/h and .h) the) #rought the a/tion is
to de/ide .ho .on. 8n/e again, .hat sounds 'i2e an eas) tas2 is sometimes an)thing #ut that.
$fter a 'ong dis/ussion of the pre/edents and do/trines app'i/a#'e to the dispute at hand, an
appe''ate de/ision ma) finish .ith a /ursor) 0order uphe'd0 or 0order nisi granted0. (ho .on
and .h)L %o ans.er that .e ha"e to go #a/2 to the 3udgment and under')ing dispute and the
e=a/t re'ief sought in the 3udgment #eing appea'ed.
5n man) important /ases there .i'' #e no .inner or 'oser I the appe''ate /ourt .i'' ha"e #een
as2ed to determine a point of 'a. and not de/ide the out/ome of the /ase. %his .as the
situation, for e=amp'e, in Donoghue v Stevenson, the famous pre/edent that esta#'ished the
#asis for the modern 'a. of 'ia#i'it) for neg'igent manufa/turing. %o this da), no one 2no.s
.hether there .as a snai' in the #ott'e of ginger #eer that 'ed to the /ase. (e on') 2no. that if
there .as and it /ou'd #e sho.n the snai' got there as a resu't of the manufa/turer0s
neg'igen/e, the manufa/turer /ou'd #e 'ia#'e to the /onsumer.
5n Donoghue v Stevenson the fa/ts of the /ase had not #een esta#'ished #) the time the appea'
rea/hed the ;ouse of *ords. 5n most /ases there .i'' #e a 3udgment de'i"ered on the #asis of
found fa/ts #efore a 1uestion of 'a. rea/hes the appe''ate /ourt. E"en then, appe''ate /ourts
.i'' not de'i"er a fina' de/ision in /ases .here the fina' determination ma) turn on the fa/ts of
the dispute. 5n these /ir/umstan/es the) ma) suggest the matter #e retried in 'ight of the
statement of 'a. the) ha"e handed do.n or the) ma) send the /ase #a/2 to the tria' /ourt to
gi"e a ru'ing #ased on the de/ision the) ha"e 3ust de'i"ered. 5n the end, )ou .i'' 2no. an
apparent ru'e of 'a. #ut ha"e 'itt'e firm guidan/e as to .here it .i'' or .i'' not app'). 5ts
am#it must #e determined #) future /ourts.
Di!tin#$i!hin# &et'een the Ratio Decidendi an" Obiter Dicta in a Ca!e
%he theoreti/a' 2e) to the /ommon 'a. s)stem of pre/edent is the a'' important distin/tion
#et.een the ratio decidendi and obiter dicta in a /ase. %he ratio decidendi is the a/tua' ru'e of
'a. stated in the ho'ding of a de/ision, a ru'e that .i'' #e #inding on future /ourts. $n obiter
dictum, on the other hand, is a 3udi/ia' pronoun/ement on the 'a. that is not integra' to the
ho'ding itse'f. (hi'e it ma) #e /onsidered #) a 'ater /ourt, an obiter dictum .i'' not esta#'ish
a ru'e of 'a. that must #e fo''o.ed #) an) /ourt. $'though this distin/tion is for the most part
mere') a 'ega' m)th, it is /arefu'') retained #) the 'a.)ers .ho uti'ise it to formu'ate 'ega'
arguments. 4e/ognising this fa/t, )ou shou'd read and summarise /ases in a manner that .i''
ena#'e )ou to argue a ru'e is the ratio decidendi or obiter dictum, as the need arises, .hen an
ana'ogous h)potheti/a' situation appears in an e=am 1uestion.
8n some rare o//asions, 3udges .i'' assist )ou to identif) the ratio decidendi or an obiter
dictum #) /ou/hing part of their de/ision in h)potheti/a' terms. For e=amp'e, )ou ma) /ome
upon a dis/ussion that reads something 'i2e this
$n a'ternati"e ground re'ied on #) the appe''ant .as ... and if 5 .ere to de/ide on that #asis 5
.ou'd pro#a#') /on/'ude that... ;o.e"er, sin/e 5 am #asing m) de/ision on the first argument
presented #) the appe''ant, 5 do not ha"e to de/ide on the #asis of this a'ternati"e argument.
Presuma#'), the entire dis/ussion of the a'ternati"e argument and the /on/'usion to .hi/h it
.ou'd 'ead are obiter. (hi'e the) /ou'd, and most 'i2e') .ou'd, #e /ited #) a /ounse' hoping
to re') on a simi'ar argument in a future /ase, opposing /ounse' shou'd #e a#'e to present it as
non-#inding dicta. %his does not mean the argument .ou'd fai', of /ourse. $n obiter dictum in
one /ase ma) #e/ome ratio decidendi in the ne=t. %he fa/t that the /on/'usion .as obiter
dictum .ou'd #e a prin/ipa' p'an2 in the opposing 'a.)er0s /ampaign to a"oid the app'i/ation
of the a'ternati"e ru'e in a 'ater /ase, ho.e"er.
$nother form of h)potheti/a' situation that sometimes appears in reported de/isions is the
fa/tua' h)potheti/a'. 5n this situation, a 3udge e=p'ains ho. she .ou'd ha"e de/ided in the
presen/e or a#sen/e of /ertain fa/ts un'i2e those in the a/tua' /ase. For e=amp'e, a 3udge ma)
e=p'ain something a'ong these 'ines
%he issue is .hether the defendant is 'ia#'e for the in3ur) suffered #) the p'aintiff as a resu't of
s'ipping on the 'ea"es on the defendant0s path.a). ;ad the defendant posted a sign stating
0Caution, path s'ipper) #e/ause of 'ea"es0, a strong /ase /ou'd #e made for re'ie"ing the
defendant of 'ia#i'it) on the #asis of noti/e to the p'aintiff. 5n this /ase, ho.e"er, there .as no
sign posted so 5 /annot use that 'ogi/ to rea/h m) de/ision.
%he o#"ious 1uestion is .hat happens in the ne=t /ase .hen there is a sign posted. %he
dis/ussion in this /ase is prima fa/ie o#iter di/ta and .ou'd #e so presented #) /ounse' for the
p'aintiff in the ne=t /ase. >ut if the defendant .ere found 'ia#'e in the first /ase, the
defendant0s 'a.)er in the ne=t might #e a#'e to use these apparent') o#iter di/ta to he'p
redefine the ratio to suit his /'ient0s /ase. For e=amp'e, if the ratio decidendi seemed to #e that
a defendant is 'ia#'e for in3uries resu'ting from his fai'ure to /'ear path.a)s on his propert),
the defendant0s 'a.)er /ou'd re/ast it in these terms the defendant is 'ia#'e for in3uries
resu'ting from his fai'ure to /'ear path.a)s on his propert) un'ess he notifies "isitors of the
dangerM
&e ('are o% What the Ca!e Doe!n)t Te *o$ a! We a! What it Doe!
$s )ou prepare )our prH/is of a /ase )ou shou'd note not on') the detai's of the /ase, #ut a'so
their immediate re'e"an/e to the ho'ding in the /aseM%he fa/ts that .ere a#sent in the
origina' /ase are as important as those .hi/h .ere present.
*et0s i''ustrate the 'ater point .ith another e=amp'e. %his one is #ased on an a/tua' fa/t
situation ta2en from the famous Eng'ish /ontra/t /ase of Parker v The South Eastern Raiway
!o. 5n Par2er, a /ustomer had deposited a #ag in a /'oa2-room at the defendant0s rai' .a)
station, paid the /'er2 2d, and re/ei"ed a paper ti/2et, on one side of .hi/h .as printed a
num#er and a date and the .ords 0&ee #a/20. %he re"erse side /ontained a num#er of /'auses
re'ating to arti/'es 'eft #) passengers, the 'ast of .hi/h .as, 0%he /ompan) .i'' not #e respon-
si#'e for an) pa/2age e=/eeding the "a'ue of N1K0. $ noti/e to the same effe/t .as printed and
hung up in the /'oa2-room. %he /ustomer, p'aintiff in the su#se1uent /ase, had 'eft a #ag
.orth N24 in the /'oa2-room and sued for /ompensation .hen the rai'.a) 'ost the #ag. $t the
tria' he /'aimed he had not seen the noti/e in the /'oa2-room and had not read the front or
#a/2 of the ti/2et. ;e further /'aimed he had thought the ti/2et .as simp') a re/eipt for
mone) paid #) him.
5t seems intuiti"e, e"en to those .ho ha"e ne"er studied /ontra/t 'a., that the /ustomer
shou'd #ear the ris2 of 'oss if the rai'.a)0s dis/'aimer of 'ia#i'it) had #een made e=p'i/it')
/'ear to the /ustomer prior to pa)ment and he had e=p'i/it') agreed to the /onditions #efore
handing o"er his 2d and the #ag. 9ost o#ser"ers .ou'd pro#a#') agree he shou'd a'so #e
e=pe/ted to #ear the 'oss e"en if he did not e=p'i/it') agree to the /onditions so 'ong as the)
.ere /'ear') e=p'ained to him #efore he paid and passed o"er the #ag I in those
/ir/umstan/es it /ou'd #e presumed that the pa)ment and #ag deposit amounted to imp'i/it
agreement .ith the terms of the /ontra/t.
&ome might sa), of /ourse, that it .ou'd #e unfair to pass the entire #urden of ris2 to the
/ustomer if he or she had no option #ut to agree to the rai'.a)0s terms, as .ou'd #e the /ase,
for e=amp'e, if the rai'.a) he'd a monopo') on the transport of goods #et.een t.o points.
%his ma) #e so, #ut su/h po'i/) de/isions are usua'') /onsidered to #e .ithin the rea'm of the
'egis'ature, not the /ourts. $s a matter of pure /ontra/t 'a., .e assume parties en3o) e1ua'
#argaining po.er, ho.e"er fi/titious that assumption ma) #e in the rea' .or'd, a'though the
presumption has /ertain') #een tempered #) the do/trine of un/ons/iona#i'it) in more re/ent
times.
%o return to the /ase at hand, the issue to #e de/ided in future /ases .here the fa/ts resem#'e
those of Parker is at .hat point the /ustomer .i'' #e ta2en to ha"e agreed to the /onditions
set do.n #) the rai'.a) as its terms for the un.ritten /ontra/t to store the /ustomer0s goods. 5f
the rai'.a) e=p'i/it') read out its /onditions of storage prior to a//eptan/e of the /ustomer0s
mone), those /onditions .ou'd /'ear') #e /onsidered to ha"e #een in/orporated into the
/ontra/t. %he /ourt in Parker suggests a simi'ar resu't .ou'd fo''o. if the /ustomer 2ne. the
rai'.a)0s /onditions .ere on the ti/2et #ut /hose not to read them. 5n fa/t, the /ourt in Parker
/on/'uded the /ustomer .ou'd #e #ound e"en if he did not 2no. the rai'.a)0s /onditions
.ere on the #a/2 of the ti/2et, so 'ong as the ti/2et .as de'i"ered to him .ith 0reasona#'e0
noti/e that the /onditions .ere spe''ed out on the ti/2et. (i'' the rai' .a) ha"e gi"en
reasona#'e noti/e if it simp') ere/ts a noti/e in the /'oa2-room setting out its /onditions and
prints them on the #a/2 of the ti/2et .ith a note on the front of the ti/2et sa)ing 0&ee #a/20L
%he ans.er to that 1uestion is not to #e found in Parker. $'though Par2er is /onsidered one of
the 'eading pre/edents in the area, at the end of the da) .e don0t 2no. if the /ustomer in that
/ase .on or 'ost. %he appe''ate /ourt that esta#'ished the ru'e of 'a. sent the /ase #a/2 for
retria' to see .hether there .as reasona#'e noti/e in that parti/u'ar /ase. %he resu'ts of the
retria' .ere ne"er reported.
$t the retria', the 3udge +or 3ur) as .as the /ase in Parker- might /on/'ude one 'arge sign
p'a/ed so as to #e noti/ed #) an)one in the /'oa2-room .ou'd #e suffi/ient to ma2e the
/ustomer a.are of the /onditions. >ut if the room had t.o doOen posters in it, of .hi/h the
noti/e of /onditions .as on') one, the 3udge might /on/'ude the /ompan) had not done
enough to ma2e the /ustomer a.are of the e=isten/e of its /onditions. &imi'ar'), if the
attendant e=p'i/it') /ommented on the /onditions, a 3udge might #e entit'ed to /on/'ude the
rai'.a) had satisfied its o#'igation in that /ase. 8n the other hand, if the attendant said,
0;ere0s )our /'aim ti/2et0 .hen handing the ti/2et to the /ustomer, he or she might #e entit'ed
to presume the /onditions on the #a/2 did not form part of the /ontra/t, not.ithstanding the
noti/e and 0&ee #a/20 note .hi/h other.ise might #e suffi/ient to ma2e the /ustomer a.are of
the e=isten/e of the /onditions. 8r, if the attendant0s /omments imp'ied /onditions different
from those on the #a/2 of the ti/2et, the 3udge might /on/'ude there .as no noti/e of the
e=isten/e of the a/tua' /onditions. $'ternati"e'), the 3udge might /on/'ude the /ustomer .as
made a.are of the a/tua' /onditions, #ut .as entit'ed to /on/'ude the) had #een superseded
#) the ora' /onditions.
(hat .ou'd happen if the /ustomer .as i''iterateL Does the rai'.a) ha"e to ta2e ea/h
/ustomer as it finds him or her or /an it presume a 'arge noti/e is suffi/ient to ma2e the
/ustomer a.are of the e=isten/e of /onditions so that the onus is on the /ustomer to as2 .hat
the /onditions are if he or she /annot read the noti/e or .riting on the ti/2etL (hat .ou'd
happen if the /ustomer 2ne. there .ere /onditions on the #a/2 of the ti/2et #ut dis/o"ered
the .riting too sma'' to readL (hat if the .riting .as sma'' #ut /ou'd #e read #) most
/ustomers not suffering from the #ad sight .hi/h aff'i/ted the parti/u'ar /ustomer .ho 'ost
the #agL Parker doesn0t te'' us the ans.ers to an) of these 1uestions. >ut the "er) a#sen/e of
definiti"e ans.ers shou'd sho. )ou .hat /an #e e=tra/ted as the ho'ding of the /ase and .hat
issues it raises, issues that shou'd #e /onsidered in the /onte=t of an e=am pro#'em.
5n an) /ase fo''o.ing Parker, the /ustomer0s 'a.)er .i'' seiOe upon a'' the fa/ts pe/u'iar to
the su#se1uent /ase to sho. .h) the #asi/ /ondition stipu'ated in Parker, ma2ing the
/ustomer a.are of the e=isten/e of the /onditions, .as not satisfied in his or her /'ient0s /ase.
%he pro/ess is t.o-fo'd. First, she .i'' tr) to sho. that the rai'.a)0s a/tions .ere insuffi/ient
in the su#se1uent /ase to ma2e /ustomers a.are of the e=isten/e of its /onditions. &e/ond,
and in the a'ternati"e, she .i'' argue that e"en if the rai'.a)0s a/tions in the su#se1uent /ase
.ere suffi/ient to ma2e /ustomers a.are of the /onditions in ordinar) /ir/umstan/es, the
a/tions .ere not suffi/ient .ith regard to her parti/u'ar /'ient. 5n this /ase, she .i'' ha"e to
/on"in/e the /ourt that the ru'e in Parker .as meant to app') to ea/h indi"idua' /ustomer, not
the rai'.a)0s a"erage /ustomerM
Recor"in# the Ree+ant Technica (!,ect! o% the -rece"ent
5t is important that )ou in/'ude .hate"er information ma) #e re'e"ant to an) 0te/hni/a'0
arguments )ou ma) .ish to raise in fa"our of or against the app'i/ation of a pre/edent. %hus,
)our prH/is shou'd note the 3urisdi/tion of the /ourt, the 'e"e' of the /ourt and, .here
appropriate, the 3udges responsi#'e for the opinion that /ounse' .ou'd 'i2e') /ite. &ome of the
so-/a''ed te/hni/a' arguments are pure') fa/tua', for e=amp'e 0%his is an Eng'ish Court of
$ppea' de/ision and of persuasi"e "a'ue on')0, .hi'e others are 'ess tangi#'e and rest more on
/on"entions and un.ritten 'ega' /odes. For e=amp'e, an important fa/tor in man) situations is
the respe/t a//orded to the 3udge de'i"ering a de/ision. De"e'oping a sense for these /odes
ta2es time #ut after a fe. )ears at 'a. s/hoo' )ou .i'' #egin to rea'ise .hi/h 3udges /ommand
greater respe/t in 'ater /ourts and .hi/h do not. 8ften these intangi#'e fa/tors ha"e 1uite an
impa/t on the 'ega' pro/ess, though the) are not found an).here in the theoreti/a' frame.or2
for the /ommon 'a. s)stem of pre/edent. %hus, for e=amp'e, .ithout 2no.ing ho. .e''
respe/ted and often /ited Di=on CJ is, )ou .ou'd not thin2 to suggest to a /ourt that a dissent
#) Di=on CJ shou'd #e fo''o.ed in preferen/e to the /'ear ma3orit) de/ision of 'ess respe/ted
3udges.
.!in# Text! an" Treati!e!
$t this point a #rief inter3e/tion on te=ts and treatises is appropriate. 5t shou'd #e /'ear that the
fa/ts of the /ase are essentia' to its pre/edentia' "a'ue. 5t is on the #asis of those fa/ts that
'a.)ers .i'' see2 to /hara/terise aspe/ts of a 3udgment as ratio decidendi or obiter dicta. !ot
a'' 'a.)ers pursue this o#3e/ti"e ho.e"er. (hi'e /onsidering, app')ing and distinguishing
/ases on the #asis of their fa/ts is the immediate /ha''enge fa/ing the pra/tising 'a.)er and
e=aminee 'a. student, others su/h as the authors of 'ega' te=ts and treatises re') on pre/edents
to de"e'op the 0ru'es of 'a.0 I the propositions and do/trines .hi/h re/on/i'e a'' the /ases
and fit the pie/es into a neat and /omp'ete 3igsa. puOO'e that ne"er e=ists in the rea' .or'd of
'itigation and appea's. >e sure )ou remem#er the ro'e of a te=t and use it a//ording'). %e=ts
.i'' he'p )ou understand an area of 'a. and 'earn the #asi/ prin/ip'es and 'ega' do/trines
forming the infrastru/ture of a 'ega' su#3e/t. %he) .i'' not, ho.e"er, spe'' out the man) .a)s
in .hi/h pre/edents and fa/t situations /an #e app'ied or distinguished in an attempt to
a/hie"e the resu't sought #) a /'ient.
.!in# the -r/ci!
4eading and summarising the /ases gi"es )ou the 2no.'edge to #egin 'earning the 'a.. Gou
.i'' #e/ome a.are of some of the issues that arise in the de/isions and re/ognise arguments
that )ou /an use to app') or distinguish the pre/edents in ana'ogous situations. 9an) more
ideas .i'' f'o. from the 'e/turer0s ana')sis of the /ase and /'assroom dis/ussion. >oth .i''
a'so #e of use in understanding ho. the de/ision and arguments arising out of it re'ate to
those raised in other /ases and other areas of 'a.M