Can you help me with the obiter dictum and ratio decidendi of R v R 1991?

Watch
satanyogi
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
I'm really struggling with this lol

The Obiter Dictum and Ratio Decidendi of the case R v R 1991 (rape inside marriage)

any help appreciated thanks!
0
reply
Patricia 0w0
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
(Original post by satanyogi)
I'm really struggling with this lol

The Obiter Dictum and Ratio Decidendi of the case R v R 1991 (rape inside marriage)

any help appreciated thanks!
Hi, I am a law student in year 13.

Obiter Dicta: something mentioned by the judge "by the way" (not necessarily related to the case). This is not binding, but could be used as a persuasive precedent (judges in later cases can still choose to follow it).

Ratio Decidendi: The decision made in the case. This is binding and must be followed in later cases.

In R v R, the ratio would be like this: a man who rapes his wife could be convicted......
The obiter dicta of this case will be other things mentioned by Lord Keith, such as : "...Apart from property matters and the availability of matrimonial remedies, one of the most important changes is that marriage is in modern times regarded as a partnership of equals, and no longer one in which the wife must be the subservient chattel of the husband..." (Source: http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-R-[1991].php).

Not sure whether this helps. Hope it makes sense.

If what you are not sure about is what obiter dicta and ratio decidendi mean, Donoghue v Stevenson would be the one can present the ideas better.
Ratio: the manufacturer must be responsible to its ultimate customers.
Obiter: the Neighbour Principle (not binding but still followed in lots of later cases)
1
reply
satanyogi
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 3 months ago
#3
(Original post by Patricia 0w0)
Hi, I am a law student in year 13.

Obiter Dicta: something mentioned by the judge "by the way" (not necessarily related to the case). This is not binding, but could be used as a persuasive precedent (judges in later cases can still choose to follow it).

Ratio Decidendi: The decision made in the case. This is binding and must be followed in later cases.

In R v R, the ratio would be like this: a man who rapes his wife could be convicted......
The obiter dicta of this case will be other things mentioned by Lord Keith, such as : "...Apart from property matters and the availability of matrimonial remedies, one of the most important changes is that marriage is in modern times regarded as a partnership of equals, and no longer one in which the wife must be the subservient chattel of the husband..." (Source: http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-R-[1991].php).

Not sure whether this helps. Hope it makes sense.

If what you are not sure about is what obiter dicta and ratio decidendi mean, Donoghue v Stevenson would be the one can present the ideas better.
Ratio: the manufacturer must be responsible to its ultimate customers.
Obiter: the Neighbour Principle (not binding but still followed in lots of later cases)
Sorry i've only just seen this but thankyou so much for taking the time to get back to me and good luck with the rest of your studies!
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you travelling in the Uni student travel window (3-9 Dec) to go home for Christmas?

Yes (99)
28.53%
No - I have already returned home (45)
12.97%
No - I plan on travelling outside these dates (67)
19.31%
No - I'm staying at my term time address over Christmas (35)
10.09%
No - I live at home during term anyway (101)
29.11%

Watched Threads

View All