An Examination of the Role of Judicial Case-Law Analysis in Enhancing a Legal System: A Comparative Study of England and France
Subject Areas : Islamic jurisprudence and lawMohammad Javad Khadem al-Shari'ah 1 , Pourya Dehghani 2
1 - Department of Law and Judicial Studies, Faculty of Law and Judicial Sciences, Judicial Sciences University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Department of Law and Judicial Studies, Faculty of Law and Judicial Sciences, Judicial Sciences University, Tehran, Iran
Keywords: Judicial case law, Iranian law, French law, English common law, Comparative study,
Abstract :
Although judicial case law is not formally recognized as an official source of law in the Iranian legal system, it plays a fundamental role in practice by resolving ambiguities, filling legislative gaps, and enhancing the predictability of judicial decisions. Adopting a comparative approach, this study examines the status and function of judicial precedent in Iran alongside two prominent legal systems: France, representing the civil-law tradition, and England, representing the common-law tradition. In France, judicial decisions, despite lacking an explicit legislative function, contribute substantially to the development of legal rules through creative and abstract interpretation. In contrast, in England, the common-law system is built upon the doctrine of precedent, and judicial decisions constitute the primary foundation upon which legal rules are formed—a feature that ensures a high degree of predictability. The findings indicate that Iran, in order to improve the effectiveness of its legal system, must strengthen the institution of judicial opinion critique, increase transparency in the publication of decisions, and acknowledge the practical role of case law in statutory interpretation. The comparative analysis further suggests that systematic engagement with case law can enhance legal coherence, improve the quality of judicial rulings, and foster greater public trust.
