Question

modern day relation between right and remedies can be described as

• A. ubi jus ibi remedium
• B. ibi remedium ubi jus
• C. Actus curiae neminem gravabit
• D. None of the above

Hint:

Ubi jus ibi remedium is the maxim that allowed the court in Ashby v. White to award damages for a violated voting right, even though no physical or financial damage occurred and no specific statutory remedy was written.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
The question asks for the classic legal maxim that describes the modern relationship between legal rights and their enforcement remedies.

Step 2: Key Principles and Statutory Provisions:
This relates to the foundational principle of justice that a legal right is meaningless unless there is a practical legal remedy to enforce it or compensate for its breach.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation and Analysis:

• The maxim "Ubi jus ibi remedium" translates directly to: "Where there is a right, there is a remedy."
This is the cornerstone of the Law of Torts and common law.

• It means that if a person has a recognized legal right, the law must also provide a forum and a remedy to protect that right or compensate for its violation.
The court will find or fashion a remedy if a right has been clearly violated.

• Option B, "Ibi remedium ubi jus", is the reverse, suggesting that a right only exists where a remedy was previously written down.
While this was true under the old English "writ system" (where you could only sue if a specific writ existed), modern jurisprudence has discarded this view in favor of "Ubi jus ibi remedium".

• Option C, "Actus curiae neminem gravabit", means "an act of the court shall prejudice no one", which is a different procedural rule.

Step 4: Final Answer:
The modern relation is represented by "ubi jus ibi remedium", making Option A the correct choice.