Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
No Body Shall be Reamydyless (Actio Personalissima) - This legal maxim emphasizes that personal actions or claims die with the individual, meaning a deceased cannot be directly sued or held liable after death. Courts in various jurisdictions recognize that actions are personal and do not survive the person unless specific laws provide otherwise. For example, in Sri Lanka, the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona was invoked to dismiss certain claims after the plaintiff's death, but courts also acknowledge that some rights may survive under statutory provisions like Section 392 of the CPC Kariyawasam Majuwanage Prabath Chaminda Perera No. 431/11 vs 1. Bandara Kalu Thanthrige Dona Mala Kanthi Perera No. 401/2 - Supreme Court.
Application of the Maxim in Court Proceedings - Courts often consider whether the law or specific statutes allow claims to survive the death of a party. In some cases, the maxim is invoked to dismiss claims, while in others, statutory rights or remedies continue despite the death of the individual involved. For instance, the maxim is used to support the idea that certain personal claims cannot be continued after death unless explicitly provided for by law Kariyawasam Majuwanage Prabath Chaminda Perera No. 431/11 vs 1. Bandara Kalu Thanthrige Dona Mala Kanthi Perera No. 401/2 - Supreme Court.
Limitations and Exceptions - The maxim is not absolute; courts may override it if statutory law or legal principles provide for the survival of a claim or right. For example, in cases involving legal heirs or statutory rights, the law may permit continuation of claims despite the death of the original party Kariyawasam Majuwanage Prabath Chaminda Perera No. 431/11 vs 1. Bandara Kalu Thanthrige Dona Mala Kanthi Perera No. 401/2 - Supreme Court.
Related Legal Maxims and Principles - The principle Ubi jus ibi remedium (where there is a right, there is a remedy) underscores that legal rights should have enforceable remedies. Additionally, the maxim Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt (the law assists those who are vigilant) highlights the importance of timely action to preserve legal rights SMT A Y SATHYAVATHI vs SRI DHANUSH C - Karnataka.
Rejection and Evolution of the Maxims - Many jurisdictions have moved away from strict adherence to these maxims, recognizing that legal rights and claims may have survival clauses or statutory provisions that override the traditional doctrine. Courts now often examine the entire context and applicable laws before dismissing claims based on these maxims Wickrama Arachchilage Dhammika Karunaratna vs Hon. The Attorney General - Court Of Appeal.
Analysis and Conclusion:The maxim No Body Shall be Reamydyless (actio personalis moritur cum persona) underscores that personal claims generally do not survive an individual's death unless law explicitly states otherwise. While historically influential, modern legal systems tend to incorporate statutory provisions allowing certain rights to survive, thus limiting the absolute application of this maxim. Courts balance these principles with statutory law and the specifics of each case, ensuring justice and remedy where appropriate.
In the realm of law, ancient maxims serve as foundational principles guiding judicial decisions and ensuring justice. One such cornerstone is No body shall be remediless, a maxim that promises a remedy for every wrong. But what does this mean in practice, and are there exceptions? This blog post delves into the maxim No Body Shall be Reamydyless Legal Maxim (often rendered as No body shall be remediless), its core principles, and critical limitations drawn from equity doctrines.
Whether you're a legal professional, student, or someone navigating a legal dispute, understanding this maxim can shed light on how courts provide—or withhold—relief. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice; consult a qualified attorney for your situation.
The maxim no body shall be remediless embodies the fundamental aim of the law: to ensure justice by providing redress for those whose rights are infringed. It underscores that where there is a right (ubi jus ibi remedium), there must be a remedy. Courts generally strive to uphold this, preventing individuals from being left without recourse when harmed Sree Gokulam Chits & Finance Company Pvt. Ltd VS State of Kerala - 2014 0 Supreme(Ker) 133.
This principle reflects equity's role in the legal system, emphasizing fairness and accessibility to justice. For instance, it supports claims for damages, injunctions, or other relief when rights are violated Sree Gokulam Chits & Finance Company Pvt. Ltd VS State of Kerala - 2014 0 Supreme(Ker) 133.
While the maxim promotes universal remedies, it is not absolute. Two pivotal equity maxims impose limitations: Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit and Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia. These ensure remedies do not lead to injustice or impossibility V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908Savitri Devi VS Daljeet Singh S/o Jangir Singh - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 417.
This Latin maxim translates to an act of the court shall prejudice no one. It protects parties from suffering due to court errors or delays. As noted in legal precedents, reference of the legal maxim 'Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit' is necessary, which means ‘an act of the Court shall prejudice no-one’ or nobody should be allowed to suffer for the fault of the court. This is an important Latin Maxim of Equity SREEJITH MON vs STATE OF KERALA - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 22022 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 22022SREEJITH MON vs STATE OF KERALA - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 83795 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 83795V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908.
In practice, courts apply this to avoid penalizing parties for procedural lapses beyond their control, such as stay orders or judicial delays. Remedies may be denied or adjusted if granting them would unjustly harm another party V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908.
The second limitation is Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia, meaning the law does not force anyone to do the impossible. This recognizes human and circumstantial limitations. For example, There is a well known legal maxim 'Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia' (Law does not compel a person to do that which he or she cannot possibly perform) R.Janaki vs The Tahsildar - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 40730 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 40730Savitri Devi VS Daljeet Singh S/o Jangir Singh - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 417Mohammed Gazi VS State Of M. P. - 2000 4 Supreme 705.
Courts invoke this when performance is infeasible, such as in cases of unforeseen events preventing compliance. It prevents harsh penalties for non-feasible obligations Savitri Devi VS Daljeet Singh S/o Jangir Singh - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 417.
These maxims come alive in litigation. Consider tender cancellations where delays stem from court stays: the court held that a person cannot be penalized for no fault of his, especially when the delay and damage were caused by circumstances beyond his control Mohammed Gazi VS State Of M. P. - 2000 4 Supreme 705. Here, Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia limited remedies.
Similarly, procedural defects not affecting core rights do not bar substantive relief, aligning with Actus Curiae Neminem GravabitSavitri Devi VS Daljeet Singh S/o Jangir Singh - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 417. In heirship disputes, impossible document production (e.g., missing death certificates) invokes the maxim to allow alternatives R.Janaki vs The Tahsildar - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 40730 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 40730.
The maxim intersects with others like actio personalis moritur cum persona (personal actions die with the person), which may limit surviving claims post-death unless statutes intervene Kariyawasam Majuwanage Prabath Chaminda Perera No. 431/11 vs 1. Bandara Kalu Thanthrige Dona Mala Kanthi Perera No. 401/2 - Supreme Court. However, modern laws often override this, allowing heirs to pursue remedies under provisions like Section 392 of the CPC.
Additionally, ubi jus ibi remedium reinforces remedies, while vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt stresses timely action SMT A Y SATHYAVATHI vs SRI DHANUSH C - Karnataka. Jurisdictions increasingly favor statutory survival of rights over rigid maxims Wickrama Arachchilage Dhammika Karunaratna vs Hon. The Attorney General - Court Of Appeal.
Remedies may be curtailed in these scenarios:1. Impossibility: Physical or legal barriers to performance (Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia) Savitri Devi VS Daljeet Singh S/o Jangir Singh - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 417.2. Court-Induced Prejudice: No penalties for judicial faults (Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit) V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908.3. Procedural Non-Essentials: Defects not undermining substance Mohammed Gazi VS State Of M. P. - 2000 4 Supreme 705.
Legal practitioners must weigh these when framing claims, ensuring feasibility to avoid dismissal.
The maxim No body shall be remediless champions justice but is wisely limited by equity principles like Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit and Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia. Courts navigate these to deliver fair outcomes, preventing impossible burdens or unjust prejudice Sree Gokulam Chits & Finance Company Pvt. Ltd VS State of Kerala - 2014 0 Supreme(Ker) 133.
Key Takeaways:- Seek remedies confidently, but anticipate equitable limits.- Document circumstances showing impossibility or court fault.- Modern statutes often expand access beyond traditional maxims.
For tailored advice, consult a legal expert. Stay informed on these timeless principles shaping today's courts.
References:- Sree Gokulam Chits & Finance Company Pvt. Ltd VS State of Kerala - 2014 0 Supreme(Ker) 133: Core principle of remedilessness.- V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908: Actus Curiae analysis.- Savitri Devi VS Daljeet Singh S/o Jangir Singh - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 417: Lex Non Cogit application.- Mohammed Gazi VS State Of M. P. - 2000 4 Supreme 705: Case illustrations.- SREEJITH MON vs STATE OF KERALA - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 22022 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 22022, SREEJITH MON vs STATE OF KERALA - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 83795 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 83795: Actus Curiae quotes.- R.Janaki vs The Tahsildar - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 40730 - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 40730: Lex Non Cogit example.
#LegalMaxims #EquityLaw #Remedies
This is a legal principle in common law that a witness who testify falsely about one matter is not all credible to testify about any other matter. At present this doctrine has been rejected by many of the common law jurisdictions. ... In the meantime, the Appellant had started to ill-treat her by pricking her body with sharp pins, dropped hot candle wax on her body and beating her with broomstick and sticks. She was ordered to wash dishes a....
In this connection, reference of the legal maxim “Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit” is necessary, which means ‘an act of the Court shall prejudice no-one’ or nobody should be allowed to suffer for the fault of the court. This is an important Latin Maxim of Equity. ... There is a well recognised maxim of equity, namely, actus curiae neminem gravabit which means an act of the Court shall prej....
In this connection, reference of the legal maxim “Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit” is necessary, which means ‘an act of the Court shall prejudice no-one’ or nobody should be allowed to suffer for the fault of the court. This is an important Latin Maxim of Equity. ... There is a well recognised maxim of equity, namely, actus curiae neminem gravabit which means an act of the Court shall prej....
Section 53 of the Co-operative Societies Ordinance, which declares that the decision of the arbitrator and/or the Registrar in a certain class of disputes between a registered co-operative society and any employee thereof " shall be final and shall not be called in question in any ... In such a case, the maxim Generalia specialibus non derogant is not applicable. ... Three Judges of the Court agreed that the maxim#HL_E....
But whether on this score, the applicant can be denied legal heir certificate is the moot point for consideration. 4.There is a well known legal maxim “Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia” (Law does not compel a person to do that which he or she cannot possibly perform). ... The petitioner should therefore be allowed to apply for legal heirship certificate without being called upon to produce the death certificate. Ubi jus ibi r....
to ascertain legislative intent and shall consider at all times the old law, the evil, and the remedy.”). ... Pursuant to that policy, Zurich initially paid the entire amount of both the settlement and the associated legal fees. However, pursuant to Maxim’s deductible, Zurich billed back $3 million of the settlement and $824,839.38 in legal fees, which Maxim reimbursed to Zurich. ... In April 2018, #HL_START....
The law is that, Civil Court assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep on their right - is relevant in this case as per the popular maxim " "Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt" is a Latin legal maxim that translates to, the law assists those who are vigilant, not those who sleep ... It is trite law that, until the Government or acquiring body lawfully assumes possession, the land continues to vest i....
Where the maxim is applied the burden is on the defendant to show either that in fact he was not negligent or that the accident might more probably have happened in a manner which did not cannot negligence on his part. ... In addition to that, to apply the maxim, res ipsa loquitur, the other circumstances of the accident are closely scrutinized by this Court. As per the MVI report of the car driven by the 2nd respondent, it had damage on its right side. ... ....
Rest of conditions as imposed by learned Claims Tribunal shall remain intact. 28. ... If the enhanced amount of compensation is in excess to the valuation of appeal, the difference of the Court fee (if not already paid) shall be deposited by the appellants- claimants within a period of one month and proof thereof, shall be submitted before the Registry. ... RJ 28/T-0338 driving bus rashly and negligently hit the motorcycle of deceased-Deven....
in our legal system and to recognize that there is a body of law, in the decisions of our courts, a body of law not English nor Roman-Dutch but which is the creation of our courts and which in Lord Diplock's words in the Kodeeswaran case may be called 'the indigenous common law' of Sri Lanka. ... , and shall proceed thereon as if he were originally named respondent therein. ... to have his name entered on the record in pla....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
