1. A
decided case doesn't constitute a precedent.
2. In his
decision the judge hasn't used a process of analogy.
3. The
common law wasn't built up by generations of judges.
4. The King
didn't exercise his personal power of justice.
1. Does a
decided case constitute a precedent?
2. Has the
judge used a process of analogy in his decision?
3. Was the
common law built up by generations of judges?
4. Did the
King exercise his personal power of justice?