Questions on precedent

[Guest Puzzling]

In

https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/36921-nominating-committee-and-board-vacancy/

Post 2 by Mr Martin , he says

"Simply doing something a certain way in the past does not create a precedent. That happens when there is a ruling by the chair on a question of order, followed by any subsequent appeal"

I thought that appeal was not necessary for establishing precedent. 

Also to change a precedent in a next similar occasion is a ruling of the chair (the chair ruling in the new way) enough , or need there be an adopted appeal against the ruling of the  chair (the chair ruling in the old way)

Even is the chair ruling in a way contrary to precedent a breach of duty? 

Also still puzzling about how to minute precedent, (and other questions of order and appeals) if it is established somewhere half way a debate , is it okay to minute it after the vote on the main question or has it to be minute before th vote? And how much detail is needed?

Because this topic is rather different from the original question I decided to make it a new topic.

[Dan Honemann]

1 hour ago, Guest Puzzling said:

I thought that appeal was not necessary for establishing precedent. 

This is correct. The ruling of the chair on a point of order creates a precedent if no appeal is taken from that ruling.

 

1 hour ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Also to change a precedent in a next similar occasion is a ruling of the chair (the chair ruling in the new way) enough 

Yes, assuming it is not overturned on appeal if an appeal is taken from it.

 

1 hour ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Even is the chair ruling in a way contrary to precedent a breach of duty? 

No.

 

1 hour ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Also still puzzling about how to minute precedent, (and other questions of order and appeals) if it is established somewhere half way a debate , is it okay to minute it after the vote on the main question or has it to be minute before th vote? 

1 hour ago, Guest Puzzling said:

And how much detail is needed?

As much as is necessary to accurately reflect what occurred.

It seems to me that circumstances will determine what point in the minutes will be best suited for the recording of points of order and appeals.

[Dan Honemann]

The last part of my response above got a bit mixed up, but I think you will be able to straighten it out.  🙂

 

 

 

[Josh Martin]

2 hours ago, Guest Puzzling said:

"Simply doing something a certain way in the past does not create a precedent. That happens when there is a ruling by the chair on a question of order, followed by any subsequent appeal"

I thought that appeal was not necessary for establishing precedent. 

I apologize if I was unclear. Perhaps I should have said "That happens when there is a ruling by the chair on a question of order, followed by a subsequent appeal (if any).

The appeal is part of the precedent if there is an appeal. But an appeal is not necessary for creating a precedent.

2 hours ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Also to change a precedent in a next similar occasion is a ruling of the chair (the chair ruling in the new way) enough , or need there be an adopted appeal against the ruling of the  chair (the chair ruling in the old way)

An appeal is not required either to create or to change a precedent, although an appeal could occur at either of these steps.

2 hours ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Even is the chair ruling in a way contrary to precedent a breach of duty? 

No, not at all. The chair might be acting contrary to precedent because the precedent is incorrect. Alternately, it might be that the facts of the present parliamentary situation are sufficiently different that the precedent is not applicable. Neither of these seems to me to be "a breach of duty." The chair's duty in this connection is to enforce the assembly's rules. A precedent is a formal interpretation of the assembly's rules, but it is not itself a rule. If the precedent conflicts with the assembly's rules, it is the chair's duty to disregard the erroneous precedent and set a new precedent.

Precedent is discussed in RONR (12th ed.) 23:10-11.