Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
law in the event: A law that only concerns one particular case. See law of the case. lex lata: the law that has been borne: The law as it is. lex loci: law of the place: lex non scripta: law that has not been written: Unwritten law, or common law: lex orandi, lex credendi: the law of prayer is the law of faith: lex paciferat: the law shall ...
The eggshell skull rule (also thin skull rule, papier-mâché-plaintiff rule, or talem qualem rule) [1] is a well-established legal doctrine in common law, used in some tort law systems, [2] with a similar doctrine applicable to criminal law. The rule states that, in a tort case, the unexpected frailty of the injured person is not a valid ...
Search for Locus classicus in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings. Start the Locus classicus article , using the Article Wizard if you wish, or add a request for it ; but please remember that Wikipedia is not a dictionary .
Res ipsa loquitur (Latin: "the thing speaks for itself") is a doctrine in common law and Roman-Dutch law jurisdictions under which a court can infer negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on how any defendant behaved in the context of tort litigation.
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 ...
Contra proferentem (Latin: "against [the] offeror"), [1] also known as "interpretation against the draftsman", is a doctrine of contractual interpretation providing that, where a promise, agreement or term is ambiguous, the preferred meaning should be the one that works against the interests of the party who provided the wording.
The term is sometimes used positively for celebrated legal cases for their precedent value (each locus classicus or "case-in-point") and more often negatively for infamous ones, whether for scale, outrage, scandal, or conspiracy theories. [3] The term is a French phrase in common usage in English.