Maxims and Fundamental Principles
1. Nemo judex in causa sua
(No one should be a judge in his own cause)
Meaning:
A person cannot act as a judge in a matter in which they have a personal interest, bias, or involvement. Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.
Purpose:
To prevent bias—whether actual, potential, or perceived—in decision-making.
Applications:
- A judge or tribunal member must withdraw if they have any direct or indirect interest.
- A government officer deciding a case about their own department’s conduct may be disqualified for bias.
Examples:
- A municipal officer cannot grant a licence to a company in which he holds shares.
- In Dimes v. Grand Junction Canal (1852), a judge’s financial interest led to disqualification even though the decision was otherwise correct.
2. Audi alteram partem
(Hear the other side)
Meaning:
No person should be condemned or disadvantaged without being given a fair opportunity to be heard.
Purpose:
To ensure participation and fairness by allowing both sides to present their case, evidence, and explanations before any adverse decision is made.
Core components:
- Notice: Adequate notice of the charges or proceedings must be given.
- Hearing: The individual must have an opportunity to present their side.
- Evidence disclosure: All material relied upon must be disclosed.
- Cross-examination: Where relevant, the affected party should be allowed to challenge opposing evidence.
Examples:
- Suspension of an employee without giving them a chance to explain is void for violating this maxim.
- In Ridge v. Baldwin (1964), a police officer’s dismissal without hearing was quashed for breach of natural justice.
3. Qui aliquid statuerit parte inaudita altera, aequum licet dixerit, haud aequum fecerit
(He who decides anything without the other side being heard, though he may have said what is right, has not done what is right)
Meaning:
This is often treated as a corollary or poetic reinforcement of audi alteram partem. It stresses that even if the decision appears substantively correct, it remains invalid if reached without fair hearing.
Significance:
It reminds authorities that procedural fairness is as vital as the correctness of the outcome.
4. Justitia nemini neganda est
(Justice should not be denied to anyone)
Meaning:
Everyone has the right to seek justice; access to courts and impartial adjudication must be available to all.
This underpins modern concepts like the right to a fair trial and open justice.
5. Reasoned decisions (Speaking orders)
Though not traditionally Latin-phrased, modern jurisprudence recognises that every decision must be reasoned.
A “speaking order” ensures that justice is transparent and reviewable.
Example:
Administrative authorities must record reasons for cancelling a licence, terminating employment, or rejecting a claim.
Broader Principles
1. The Principle of Impartiality
(Lord Hewart’s principle — “Justice should not only be done, but should be seen to be done”)
Essence:
Justice requires complete independence and neutrality of the decision-maker.
It is not enough for judges or officials to be fair; they must also appear fair in the eyes of a reasonable observer.
Purpose:
To preserve public confidence in the legal system.
Key case:
R v. Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy (1924) — as you noted, where Lord Hewart, C.J. made this timeless statement.
Core idea:
The appearance of bias destroys the reality of fairness.
2. The Principle of Fair Hearing
(Audi alteram partem — “Hear the other side”)
Essence:
No person should suffer or be condemned without a fair opportunity to present their case, respond to evidence, and be heard before an unbiased tribunal.
Purpose:
To guarantee participation, transparency, and protection against arbitrary power.
Key case:
Ridge v. Baldwin (1964) — where a dismissal without hearing was struck down.
Core idea:
➡️ No justice without voice.
3. The Principle of Reasoned Decision (Speaking Orders)
Essence:
Every judicial or administrative decision must state the reasons for it.
This ensures that justice is intelligible, reviewable, and accountable.
Purpose:
To prevent arbitrary exercise of power and to enable appeals or reviews.
Key case:
Alexander Machinery Ltd v. Crabtree (1974) — “Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice.”
Core idea:
Justice must be explained to be legitimate.
4. The Principle of Equality Before the Law
(Rule of Law — Diceyan principle)
Essence:
Every person, regardless of status, wealth, or office, is subject to the same law administered by ordinary courts.
Purpose:
To prevent privilege, discrimination, or selective application of justice.
Key reference:
A.V. Dicey’s exposition in The Law of the Constitution (1885) —
“Every man, whatever his rank or condition, is subject to the ordinary law of the realm.”
Core idea:
No one is above the law.
5. The Principle of Proportionality
Essence:
Actions taken by authorities must be proportionate to their legitimate aim; punishment or restrictions should not exceed necessity.
Purpose:
To balance individual rights against public interests and prevent excessive use of power.
Modern use:
Central in human rights and constitutional law — particularly in judicial review.
Core idea:
Justice demands balance, not excess.
6. The Principle of Legality
Essence:
Government and officials can act only under the authority of law.
There is no punishment or detriment except in accordance with the law.
Purpose:
To ensure that justice operates under clear, pre-established legal norms.
Key expression:
From the Latin maxim nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege — “no crime, no punishment without law.”
Core idea:
Justice must rest on law, not will.
7. The Principle of Access to Justice
Essence:
Every individual must have a fair and affordable opportunity to seek redress before a competent tribunal.
Purpose:
To prevent justice from being a privilege of the wealthy or powerful.
Key expression:
Justitia nemini neganda est — “Justice is to be denied to none.”
Modern versions appear in constitutional guarantees of fair trial and legal aid.
Core idea:
Justice denied by inaccessibility is justice destroyed.
8. The Principle of Finality and Certainty
Essence:
Litigation must eventually come to an end; justice requires certainty and repose as much as fairness.
Purpose:
To protect individuals and society from endless dispute or insecurity of rights.
Core idea:
Endless litigation is injustice by delay.
Leave a Reply