ENGLISH PROJECT

TOPIC-Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget.

MADE BY- Akansha Gupta BBA LLB (H).

ENROLLMENT NO. - A11921513008

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am very thankful to everyone who supported me, for i have completed my project effectively and on time.I am equally thankful to my teacher, she gave me moral support and guided me in different matters regarding the topic.She had been very kind and patient while suggesting me the outlines of the project and correcting my doubts. I thank her for her overall support.I would also like to thank my parent for helping me in making of the project and for giving me ideas on the topics.

Thank you!

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENCITY

This is to certify that Akansha Gupta , student of BBA-LLB(H) of Amity Law School , Centre II , Noida of Amity University , Uttar Pradesh , have successfully completed the project on the topic ‘’Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget’’ under the guidance of our english teacher. The project is absolutely genuine and do not indulge in any plagiarism of any kind

(Akansha Gupta).

CONTENTS:

1) INTRODUCTION

2) A STUDY ON LEGAL MAXIM :”ABSOLUTA SENTENTIA EXPOSITORE NON INDIGET”

3) USE OF MAXIMS IN LEGAL JUDGEMENT

4) CASE LAW :

INTRODUCTION

DEFINITION AND ORIGIN OF MAXIMS IN :

Maxim can be defined as an established principle or proposition. A tenet of law universally admitted as being just and consonant with reasons. Lord Coke said: — “Maxims are a sure foundation or ground of art and a conclusion of reason, so sure and uncontrolled that they ought not to be questioned”. Maxims in law are said to be somewhat like axioms in geometry. They are the principles and authorities, and part of the general customs or common law of the land. These are sort of legal capsules, useful in dispensing justice.

Maxims have been divided, as to their origin, into three classes: — Roman, Roman modified, and indigenous. They are mostly derived from civil law, either literally or by adaptation, and most of those which are not found in the Roman sources are the invention of medieval jurists. The earliest work on maxims appears to have been that of Bacon (1630) followed by Noy (1641), Wingate (1658), Heath (Pleading, 1694), Francis (1723), Grounds and Rudiments of Law and Equity (Anonymous, 1751, of which Francis was the author), Branch (1753), Logtt (1776, in his Reports). Broom (1845), Trayner (1872, 1883), Cotteral (1881, 1894), and Wharton’s Dictionary (1848, 1892), Lawson (1883), Bells Dictionary (Scotch, 1890), Petoubet (New York, 1880), Barton, Stimson, Morgan, Taylor, Hening, Halkerston, Jackson (Law Latin), and Hughes.

The tenets of law canonized in maxim are the precepts, ideals and techniques of law referring a general truth drawn from experience. In the olden days great majority of questions apropos the rights, remedies and liabilities to private individuals were determined with reference to maxims. The lasting importance of maxims is well expressed by Lord Cameron in an article on “Maxims,” in Green’s Encyclopedia of the Law of Scotland (Vol. 9, para 1201) where he says:— “In legal discussions reference is constantly being made to certain principles of common sense and justice, which are necessarily the same in the legal systems of all nations. Many of these

fundamental principles and rules, founded on experience and reason, have found expression in the legal maxims, most of which are derived directly or indirectly from the Roman law. Nowhere is the faculty of clear and terse statement of legal principles more conspicuously exhibited than in the texts of the civil law. Accordingly, while the legal systems of modern civilized nations differ greatly in their technical rules and forms, all of them recognise the value of the simple and apposite statements of fundamental principles embodied in the maxims of Roman jurisprudence.”

But all the maxims did not have a respectable origin. Lord Denning in his book “The Family Story” has described his fascination for the use of maxims. He was very fond of a particular maxim: “FIAT JUASTITIA RUAT COELUM” (Justice should be done though the heaven falls). But when he investigated its origin, he discarded the “RUAT COELUM” part of the maxim. According to Lord Denning, if justice is done, the heaven should not fall. They should rejoice.

The story as to this maxim as referred by Lord Denning was told by SENECA (dialogues, III, 18). Piso sentenced a soldier to death for the murder of Gaius. He ordered a Centurion (Commander) to execute the sentence. When the soldier was about to be executed, Gaius came forward himself alive and well. The Centurion reported it to Piso. He sentenced all three to death. The soldier because he had already been sentenced, the Centurion for disobeying orders and Gaius for being the cause of the death of two innocent men. Piso excused it by plea, “FIAT JUASTITIA RUAT COELUM” — let justice be done, though the heaven should fall. Here command of sovereign was equated with justice. But the dictum is not used in this sense. It is always used by the Courts for furthering the cause of justice.

The principles enunciated in the maxims should be applied with due care, as there are exceptions to the rule and qualification for applicability of dictum. Maxims are the condensed good sense of notions

A STUDY ON LEGAL MAXIM:

ABSOLUTA SENTENTIA EXPOSITORE NON INDIGET” –

an absolute judgement needs no expositor. (Plain words require no explanation).

When the language of the statute is transparently plain, it is wrong to give it colour according to the temper of time. When the language implied by the enactment is clear, there is no question of interpreting the provisions in any manner except by giving them their plain and obvious meaning. Nebulous concept of the legislative intent cannot be used to curtail the explicit provisions in a statute.

The subject of legal maxims has depth of an ocean. To comprehend it within the limit of this paper is like seeing Himalaya in a flash of lightning. I am reminded of the story of the legendary Harvard Law Professor Edward “Bull” Warren. He was so enthusiastic about his subject that he always went on after the bell at the end of the class. His students were continually late to their next class, so they decided to start shuffling their feet to let the Professor know when to stop. The first time they tried it, “Bull” roared: “Quiet! I still have a few more pearls to cast!”

THE USE OF MAXIMS IN LEGAL JUDGEMENT

The jurisdiction of any Court is circumscribed by the subject matter in dispute in a suit and the issues raised in that suit for determination. If the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of the Court, then the Court is required to determine the issues raised in the suit and is not expected to go beyond the issues.

In determining such issues, properly raised, Courts, including Appellate Courts cautiously abstain from deciding more than what the immediate point submitted for their consideration requires1

Judgments of our Courts, excluding of course the Supreme Court are rendered in long and winding fashion because all sorts of expatiations, adumbrations, criticisms and reference to previous dicta are embedded therein, making the judgments cumbersome and lumbering. The maxim is absoluta sententia expositore non indiget. This means that once the words are plain and are capable of only one interpretation no explanation of them is required. A clear statement, or sentence or proposition requires no expositor or interpreter. Judgments should therefore center on the issues in a case and not indulge the academic whims of the writer. Let us repeat that, that system of law is the best, which leaves least in the discretion of the Judge and that Judge, the best who relies least on his opinion. When once it is appreciated that the law is not interested in the personal opinion of the Judge but in his exposition of the law, the need to avoid elegant and elaborate prose writing and the use of unnecessary imagery and side comments would become imperative. The Rule of Law is established, when the Law is, by judicial declaration, made certain and when absurdities are not accepted whether at Law or in equity.

CASE LAW :

Bombay High CourtMahavirprasad Badrida vs M.S. Yagnik on 27 July, 1959Equivalent citations: (1959) 61 BOMLR 1433Author: ShahBench: Shah, S Desai

Judgement:

(20) where the language of an enactment is plain and clear upon its face and of itself fairly susceptible of one meaning the task of interpretation can hardly be said to have arisen. Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget. But language at best is not a perfect medium of expression and a variety of siginifications often lives in a word or expression. Any examination of cases involving construction of statutes must reveal that few words are so plain that the context or the occasion is without capacity to enlarge or narrow their extentions , so if the Legislature of a country has been accustomed to use any word or expression with a more restricted or extended meaning than might be commonly attributed to it in its oridinary sense the court should not blindly shut out that consideration but should avail of that assistance. Albeit limited, in the process of interpretation. Legislative practice is one of the accepted aids to construction and furnishes extrimisc evidence to which resort may legtimately be had when the court has to construe a word or phrase and the task of preferring one meaning to another can really be said to have arisen.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1) www.icaivisakhapatnam.org 2) www.lawyersclub.com 3) www.ocean-anaedo.org 4) www.ifheindia.com