Rule of law

[actionmanandy]

For law seemingly ceases to be law if judges are entitled to rethink its wisdom in every case to which it applies and to disregard it whenever it is inferior to the rule that they would fashion."[61].
We all know its hard work understading some of this. Can anyone give me a personal view on this statement.
I have started writing a book about all I have learned from this and other sites and freemen. I am trying to make it law for dummies style.
Love and peace

[marko]

It must be a reference to 'case-law' / precedents set etc. In essence, Judges overuling other Judges on cases they have heard, creating 'new' law...it,s some ways it's very odd in that...'is is law or is it not'? My view is though, with precedents set by virture of new cases...we would lose much of the 'case-law' that does in fact fall in favour of the common man and some very fair and just issues...some do go against that particular grain though. Most of it being applicable to statues and acts....and very few changing the basis of common law...in fact I can,t think of an example of common law being 'changed' by virtue of case law...some issues relating to the offence of murder do spring to mind though....this is why I personally embrace common law as the keystone of our society...and area of the legal system which mostly, they cannot tamper with........