Legal Definitions - binding instruction

A binding instruction is a directive given by a judge to a jury that they must accept as true or apply as law, without any discretion to decide otherwise. It essentially removes a specific factual or legal question from the jury's deliberation, requiring them to follow the judge's guidance on that particular point.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Example 1: Stipulated Fact in a Property Dispute

  In a lawsuit concerning a property line dispute, both the plaintiff and the defendant agree that a specific survey map, dated 1985, accurately depicts the original boundaries. During the trial, the judge would issue a binding instruction to the jury stating, "You must accept that the 1985 survey map accurately represents the property's original boundaries. You are not to deliberate on the authenticity or accuracy of this map."

  How it illustrates the term: This instruction removes the question of the map's accuracy from the jury's consideration. The jury is legally bound to treat the map as an undisputed fact, focusing their deliberations on other aspects of the case, such as whether those boundaries were respected over time.

• Example 2: Undisputed Element in a Breach of Contract Case

  Consider a case where a business owner is suing a supplier for breach of contract. The existence of a written contract, signed by both parties, and the fact that the supplier failed to deliver the goods on time are not disputed. The only question for the jury is whether the breach caused the business owner to suffer financial losses. The judge might give a binding instruction: "You must find that a valid contract existed between the plaintiff and the defendant, and that the defendant failed to deliver the goods as specified. Your role is to determine if this failure resulted in damages to the plaintiff and, if so, the amount of those damages."

  How it illustrates the term: Here, the judge is directing the jury on specific legal conclusions (existence of contract, fact of non-delivery) that are not in dispute. The jury is bound to accept these points as established, and their task is narrowed to assessing the consequences (damages).

• Example 3: Legal Interpretation in a Personal Injury Claim

  In a personal injury case arising from a slip-and-fall incident, the plaintiff claims the property owner was negligent. The judge determines, based on legal precedent and the specific facts presented, that a particular safety standard (e.g., the requirement for a handrail on a certain type of staircase) applies to the property. The judge could issue a binding instruction: "You are instructed that, under the law, the staircase in question was required to have a handrail. You must consider whether the absence of a handrail contributed to the plaintiff's fall."

  How it illustrates the term: This instruction dictates a specific legal interpretation to the jury. They are not permitted to debate whether a handrail was legally necessary; they must accept the judge's ruling on that point and apply it to the facts of the case.