Law
The Role of Legal Precedent in Civil Law Jurisdictions
Quick fact
In civil law jurisdictions, while precedent is not formally binding, a consistent series of decisions on the same point can acquire persuasive authority that judges rarely disregard, effectively making it binding in practice.
Why this is interesting
You might think judges in France or Germany simply apply the law by the book, but they often look to past decisions. Why would they do that if precedent isn't binding?