It is a concept derived from English common law, whereby a judgment comprises only two elements: ratio decidendi and obiter dicta.
[1] Unlike ratio decidendi, obiter dicta are not the subject of the judicial decision, even if they happen to be correct statements of law.
University of Florida scholars Teresa Reid-Rambo and Leanne Pflaum explain the process by which obiter dicta may become binding.
[4]Under the doctrine of stare decisis, statements constituting obiter dicta are not binding, although in some jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, they can be strongly persuasive.
Given that the landlord did not wish to recover any back rent, Denning's addition was clearly obiter, yet this statement became the basis for the modern revival of promissory estoppel.
In Shaw v DPP [1962][15] a publisher of the Ladies Directory (a guide to London prostitutes) was convicted of "conspiracy to corrupt public morals".
Viscount Simonds said: "...there remains in the Courts of Law a residual power ... to conserve the moral welfare of the State, and ... guard it against attacks which may be the more insidious because they are novel and unprepared for."
Subsequently, Lord Reid was the leading judge in Knuller v. DPP,[16] a case on obscene libel in which a publisher was charged with "conspiracy to corrupt public morals".