Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A legal maxim is an established principle or proposition of law, and a species of aphorism and general maxim.The word is apparently a variant of the Latin maxima, but this latter word is not found in extant texts of Roman law with any denotation exactly analogous to that of a legal maxim in the Medieval or modern definition, but the treatises of many of the Roman jurists on regular ...
"Delays in the law are hateful" – In diem vivere in lege sunt detestabilis – is a Latin legal maxim. [15] On the other hand, "No delay [in law] is long concerning the death of a man," is another Latin lawyer's aphorism. [15] And, "It is not to be imagined, that the King will be guilty of vexatious delays." [16]
Maxims of equity are legal maxims that serve as a set of general principles or rules which are said to govern the way in which equity operates. They tend to illustrate the qualities of equity, in contrast to the common law, as a more flexible, responsive approach to the needs of the individual, inclined to take into account the parties' conduct and worthiness.
Major questions doctrine; Male captus bene detentus; Margin of appreciation; María Clara doctrine; Market share liability; Mater semper certa est; Maxims of equity; Maxwellisation; Medical necessity; Meeting of the minds; Merger doctrine; Merger doctrine (civil procedure) Merger doctrine (copyright law) Merger doctrine (family law) Merger ...
An example is law prohibiting genocide. jus gentium: law of nations Customary law followed by all nations. Nations being at peace with one another, without having to have an actual peace treaty in force, would be an example of this concept. jus in bello: law in war Laws governing the conduct of parties in war. jus inter gentes: law between the ...
Hard cases make bad law is an adage or legal maxim meaning that an extreme case is a poor basis for a general law that would cover a wider range of less extreme cases. In other words, a general law is better drafted for the average circumstance as this will be more common.
In its more modern usage, the phrase has become a watchword about the erosion of civil liberties during wartime. In the immediate wake of the September 11 attacks, the maxim was aired and questioned in the media of the United States with renewed force. The implication of the saying, as currently used, is in debate whether civil liberties and ...
Here the e contrario argument is used fallaciously in two ways: it places the letter of the law above its intent, and mistakes a time, place, and manner law regulating letters and telegraphs, for a law only authorizing letters and telegraphs, which is it not. Novel legal cases often hinge on more cogent arguments of the form: