legal maxim

▪ law

      a broad proposition (usually stated in a fixed Latin form), a number of which have been used by lawyers since the 17th century or earlier. Some of them can be traced to early Roman law. Much more general in scope than ordinary rules of law, legal maxims commonly formulate a legal policy or ideal that judges are supposed to consider in deciding cases. Maxims do not normally have the dogmatic authority of statutes and are usually not considered to be law except to the extent of their application in adjudicated cases. In California some maxims have been incorporated into the civil code; one example is, “Anyone may waive the advantage of a law intended solely for his benefit. But a law established for a public reason cannot be contravened by a private agreement.” (Thus, an agreement not to invoke the statute of limitations is binding, but an agreement not to plead that a certain contract constitutes an illegal restraint of trade is not.) Another example is, “The law never requires impossibilities”: Lex non cogit ad impossibilia. (Thus, an actor who becomes ill is excused from performing even though his contract does not so state.)

      With the expansion of commerce and industry in the 16th and 17th centuries, English courts were called upon to decide many novel cases for which the rules of medieval common law provided little or no guidance, and judges felt the need for broad, authoritative principles to support their decisions. The English lawyer and philosopher Francis Bacon (Bacon, Francis, Viscount Saint Alban (or Albans), Baron of Verulam) (1561–1626) composed a collection of maxims of the common law in Latin with an elaborate English commentary on each; and the writings of the English jurist Sir Edward Coke (Coke, Sir Edward) (1552–1634) were replete with similar Latin aphorisms, some borrowed from Roman law, others invented. Collections of maxims, usually followed by explanatory comments and references to illustrative cases, continued to appear during the next three centuries in England and the United States. With the accumulation of statutes, precedents, and voluminous textbooks, however, the maxims steadily declined in importance. Eventually, they were criticized by judges for what had once been considered their most valuable characteristic: their generality and vagueness. Although some of the ideas embodied in them retain considerable influence, the maxims themselves are now less often referred to.

      Legal maxims are invoked with more frequency in international law, where their breadth and implied universal acceptance has greater appeal.

* * *