Understanding Quod Vero Contra Rationem Juris Receptum Est, Non Est Producendum Ad Consequentias in Law
Definition & meaning
The phrase "Quod vero contra rationem juris receptum est, non est producendum ad consequentias" translates to "That which is accepted against the reason of the law is not to be extended to consequences." This legal maxim emphasizes that legal principles or precedents that contradict established legal reasoning should not be used to justify further legal decisions or outcomes. Essentially, if a legal concept is accepted but goes against the fundamental principles of law, it should not be relied upon in future cases.
Legal use & context
This maxim is often referenced in legal discussions regarding the validity and applicability of certain legal precedents. It is particularly relevant in fields such as civil law, where courts may need to determine whether to uphold a precedent that contradicts established legal reasoning. Legal practitioners may use this maxim when arguing against the application of a precedent that does not align with the core principles of justice and legality. Users can manage related legal documents using templates from US Legal Forms to ensure compliance with legal standards.
Real-world examples
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
Example 1: A court may have previously accepted a ruling based on a flawed interpretation of the law. In future cases, attorneys may argue that this ruling should not be applied as a precedent because it contradicts the core principles of justice.
Example 2: If a particular statute is interpreted in a way that goes against the intent of the law, subsequent cases referencing this interpretation could be challenged based on this maxim. (hypothetical example)