How Law Can Be Made Dynamic: Principle of Prospective Overruling

Doctrine of Prospective Overruling – Meaning

The basic meaning of prospective overruling is to construe an earlier decision in a way so as to suit the present day needs, but in such a way that it does not create a binding effect upon the parties to the original case or other parties bound by the precedent. The use of this doctrine overrules an earlier laid down precedent with effect limited to future cases and all the events that occurred before it are bound by the old precedent itself. In simpler terms it means that the court is laying down a new law for the future.
 

There are two aspects to the doctrine of prospective overruling. The first aspect was laid down by Lord Blackstone, according to this theory Judges don't make the law; their job is to define the law. They should however follow the doctrine of Stare Decisis. The doctrine of Stare Decisis means "to stand by precedent and not to disturb the settled point of law"(N.K Jayakumar “Judicial Process in India” APH Publishing Corporation); the logic behind this doctrine is that people should not get confused as to what is legal and what is illegal.

The second aspect was propounded by Cardozo J. and Lerned Hand J. who were strongly in support of the Doctrine of Prospective Overruling. According to them if this doctrine is not given effect it will wash away the whole dynamic nature of law, it will be against the concept of judicial activism. Cardozo J. was of the view that the law should keep up with the changes occurring in the society, the law has to be dynamic and not static. If in a new and changed society, the citizens are bound by an old law it will lead to grave injustice. The citizens whose lives are bound by the law of land should be given laws according to changed needs. Therefore the doctrine of Prospective Overruling is an important tool in the hand of judiciary to give fair and timely justice to its citizens.

The Doctrine of prospective overruling supplies the gap in legal theory and offers the doctrinal foundations for an extended view of judicial function with built in discretion in the Court to indicate the time dimension and the type of cases for which the holding in a particular case shall have operative effect. Mathew J. explains the thrust of the rationale behind the doctrine of prospective overruling by observing that it is not meant to supplant the Blackstonian doctrine but' is a necessary device in any system of law to protect the interest of the litigant public when judicial overruling of a precedent entails a change in the law.

 

Source: Blog: Indian Law, Owner: Pavithra, LL.M. Student, Mangalore