Q.The following is a statement about Ecuador's judicial precedent system. What similarities/differences do you find with India's judicial system?

Ecuador's courts, as described, have no binding precedent and no requirement for judges to explain their reasoning in writing. …

The statement about Ecuador makes three specific claims: its courts have no real body of binding judicial precedent; judges are not required to follow the rulings of higher courts in earlier, similar cases; and an appellate judge need not even provide a written decision explaining the legal reasoning behind a ruling — so a similar case can be decided differently on different days, with no explanation required.

India's system is built almost the opposite way. The Supreme Court's decisions are binding on every other court in the country, and its orders are enforceable everywhere — a fact this chapter grounds directly in Article 144, which requires all civil and judicial authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court. Reasoned written judgments are the norm, not the exception, and Indian courts do generally follow precedent, giving the system a predictability that the Ecuador description says its courts lack. …