Loading page
About this tool
Search common Latin legal maxims by phrase or meaning, with literal translation, plain-language sense and a worked example.
A searchable reference of the Latin maxims that appear in common-law judgments, statutes and law-school syllabi, each with its literal translation, what the principle actually does in practice, and a worked example. Search works both ways: type the Latin, or type the idea you half-remember — 'hear the other side' finds audi alteram partem, 'burden of proof' finds actori incumbit onus probandi. Entries are grouped by area, from natural justice and criminal law to the rules of statutory interpretation such as ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis.
Open Latin Legal Maxims Reference on AltFTool — it loads instantly in your browser.
Add your input to the workspace.
Adjust the options until the result looks right.
Copy or download the output and put it to work.
Every entry says what the principle does in practice, not just what the Latin translates to.
Matching runs over the translation and the explanation, so you can find a maxim you cannot spell.
Filter to natural justice, interpretation, evidence or the constitutional writs and read them together.
Hear the other side. It is the rule of natural justice that no one may be condemned without notice of the case against them and a genuine opportunity to answer it. A decision taken without that opportunity can be set aside however strong the underlying evidence, because the defect is in the process rather than the merits.
The ratio decidendi is the rule of law on which the outcome actually turned, and it is the binding part of a judgment. Obiter dicta are observations made along the way that were not necessary to the decision — persuasive, sometimes very persuasive, but not binding on a later court.
Damnum sine injuria is real loss with no violation of a legal right, and gives no cause of action — losing customers to a lawful competitor is the standard example. Injuria sine damno is the violation of a right with no measurable loss, and is actionable, though the damages may be nominal.
Not as a rule of law. Indian courts treat it as a rule of caution: where part of a witness's evidence is untrue or exaggerated, the court sifts the reliable portion from the rest rather than rejecting the testimony wholesale, as courts in some other systems do.