I think this could be a deeper idea than presented here.

Precedent, as a rule, is a bad thing. Precedent is what prevents change; it doesn't allow people to look at a situation clearly. It causes everyone to look at things like "Well, back in 1384, we said this, so let's go with that." Precedent made seperate but equal legal for 50 years (Plessy vs. Ferguson). One court from 100 years ago says "Foo" and that's the way it is forever.

A better way to do it would be to ban precedent in the court room. This would allow a court case to have weight (it's the law) and yet prevents people from using it for 100 years (the next case would have to be heard).