A judge’s decision might be just “wrong” – no need to add “vituperative epithets”

The team at Murrays Legal highlights Justice Ian Jackman’s recent Federal Court ruling rejecting the notion that first-instance judges are bound by prior single-judge decisions, arguing that judicial consistency should not come at the expense of perpetuating legal error and that there’s no need for “vituperative epithets” when departing from earlier rulings—only a “compelling reason”, noting similar tensions in bankruptcy law where competing Full Federal Court decisions long sowed confusion until ultimately settled by the High Court.

Read more.