They may consider precedent rulings as factors in the decision, but those earlier rulings themselves do not automatically become law for all future cases on the same subject.
Not quite that simple. The word we use is jurisprudentie but it means the same. Opening up the Dutch Wikipedia article and clicking on the English version of the article with thst name, you end up with "Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, is a law that is based on precedents"
I dove into this when I first heard of the difference between continental law and common law, and found it to be mostly a matter of wording. The principles are opposite but the effects very similar. It's not as though common law countries have no politicians making legislation, or as though there is no precedence in continental law countries.
Dutch foundational law (I think the very first article) says "everyone is treated equally given equal circumstances": such an equality principle would be incompatible with different rulings in identical situations. I imagine most countries have equality as a foundational principle, hence I'd be interested to learn: In which country would rulings not set precedence?
Precendent rulings and legislations are separate things in civil law countries. Not separating them is how the U.S. got the Roe v. Wade fiasco.
No two court cases are completely identical. Precedents are an important reference but they themselves do not automatically decide the outcome in civil law jurisdictions
They may consider precedent rulings as factors in the decision, but those earlier rulings themselves do not automatically become law for all future cases on the same subject.