His argument being that a court of last resort must follow its own rulings, because it matters more that decisions at final appeal are consistent and (subject to legislative intervention) conclusive than that individuals are never the casualties of unfortunate precedents: see, e.g., London Street Tramways Co. v. London C.C. [1898] A.C. 375, 379. (Unless otherwise indicated, all cases cited are House of Lords decisions.) 2 See, e.g., Brook's Wharf v.