14. “These principles have been recognized over time in the form of bills of rights and constitutions of various countries that have recognized the Roman maxim `Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium`, that is, that any right, if violated, must be accompanied by a right to a remedy. In court decisions, the concept of access to justice has been examined and elaborated in order to include, inter alia, the Obligation of the State to provide all its citizens with the means to settle disputes between them over their respective legal rights. The one who is first in time is stronger in the claim. A legal principle according to which older laws take precedence over newer ones. 11. `The rules of interpretation do not permit the interpretation of Article 27 in the exception created by those terms. Moreover, such a path cannot be chosen without violating well-known maxims that apply to the interpretation of laws, such as “expressio unius est exclusio alterius” (the explicit mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another), “Quando aliquid prohibetur, prohibetur et omne per quod devenitur ad illud” (if something is prohibited, everything related to it is, prohibited), and “Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo prohibetur et per obliquum” (if something is directly prohibited, it is also indirectly prohibited). Article 27 of the Evidence Order must therefore be understood as permitting evidence only statements which do not fall within the prohibition laid down in Article 122(3). This legal maxim states that every accused has the right to plead not guilty and that a witness is not obliged to give an answer or present a document that will incriminate him. Because not only does our law refuse to ask a person to accuse himself, but he will not admit his confession unless it is proven that they were made free and voluntary. The attitude of the early English commentators towards the maximum of the law was an attitude of admiration without mixing.
In Thomas Hobbes, Doctor and Student (p. 26), they are described as having the same force and effect in the law as the laws. Not only, according to Francis Bacon in the preface to his collection of maxims: the use of maxims “will serve to remove doubts and promote the solidity of judgment, but also to decorate arguments, to correct unprofitable subtlety and reduce it to a more solid and substantial sense of law, to recover vulgar errors and, in general, to change the nature and complexion of the whole law to some extent.” [1] [2] Simply put, this is a fundamental legal maxim of agency law. This is a maxim that is often stated when discussing the employer`s responsibility for the employee`s act versus the vicarious agent`s liability (indirect, second-hand). 3. `This Article and Article 70 of the Consumer Protection Act are both based on the principle formulated by the principle Maxims accessio cedit (elevation follows the principle) and accessorium non ducit sed sequitur suum principal (what is the accessory or incident does not lead, but follows its principle). However, for the purposes of this Section and paragraph 70, it is necessary that the property or the law claimed by the hypothecary debtor under this Section or by the hypothecary creditor under Article 70 constitute membership. English legal terms are full of Latin words and phrases. Some of these terms are so common that you use them today without any problems or confusion. Take, for example, these words: 98. Pacta Sunt Servanda – agreements must be respected.
Or the agreements are legally binding. According to the maxim, tort or contractual acts are destroyed by the death of the injured party or the injured party. Certain legal grounds can no longer be invoked after the death of a person, in some cases in defamation. It also applied to actions resulting from contracts of a purely personal nature, such as the promise to marry. A legal claim or claim cannot arise from an unlawful act or omission. If a fact results from illegal or illegal acts or omissions, it cannot form the basis of laws or legal rights, even if it is public or important. If the initial act does not comply with the law, all subsequent and resulting proceedings fail on the grounds that the illegality goes to the root of the entire event. 17.
“At one point, our conscience made us reluctant to grant relief, since the petitioner`s behaviour of not making contributions, contributing to the employees` pension fund system and not transferring them to the fund did not warrant relief for them. But we are reminded that in such matters, it is the legal conscience that must make the decision. This reminds us of some Latin maxims, Concientia Legi Nunquam Contravenit, which means that legal conscience never violates the law. “Cessante ratione legis, cessat and ipsa lex (the reason for terminating a law, the law itself ceases) is one of the oldest known maxims of our law, and it is constantly followed by our courts. Of this maxim, it was said in Beardsley v.