Legal maxims are short sayings, usually in Latin, that explain important legal doctrines. For students preparing for SLAT 2027 Legal Reasoning, legal maxims can be helpful because they offer simple explanations of key concepts that recur in laws and legal reasoning.
It would be unwise for SLAT 2027 candidates to learn complex legal terminology without comprehending it. The best method would be to learn the Top 50 Legal Maxims for SLAT 2027, what the maxims stand for, and apply the doctrine where necessary. This would be quite helpful while answering principle-based questions in the SLAT Legal Reasoning examination and SLAT 2027 preparation.
Below are the Top 50 Legal Maxims that SLAT 2027 aspirants should be aware of. Students can also check the SLAT 2027 most repeated topics to focus on.
S. No. | Legal Maxim | Meaning | Example |
1 | Actio personalis moritur cum persona | A personal action dies with the person. | Certain purely personal claims may not survive the death of the claimant, although modern law provides important exceptions. |
2 | Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea | An act does not make a person guilty unless accompanied by a guilty mind. | A criminal offence may require both a prohibited act and the required criminal intention. |
3 | Actus reus | The physical or external element of a crime. | The actual conduct constituting a criminal offence may be described as actus reus. |
4 | Ad hoc | Created or done for a particular purpose or situation. | A committee established to deal with one specific issue may be described as an ad hoc committee. |
5 | Amicus curiae | Friend of the court. | A person appointed or permitted to assist the court may provide relevant legal or factual assistance without being a party to the dispute. |
6 | Audi alteram partem | Hear the other side. | A person affected by a decision should generally be given a reasonable opportunity to present their case. |
7 | Bona fide | In good faith. | A person acting honestly and without fraudulent intention may be described as acting bona fide. |
8 | Caveat emptor | Let the buyer beware. | A buyer is generally expected to exercise reasonable care before purchasing goods, subject to statutory protections and exceptions. |
9 | Caveat venditor | Let the seller beware. | Sellers may be responsible for complying with legal requirements concerning the quality, safety and description of goods. |
10 | Consensus ad idem | Meeting of minds. | For a valid agreement, the parties must agree upon the same thing in the same sense. |
11 | Damnum sine injuria | Damage without legal injury. | A person may suffer financial loss even though no legally protected right has been violated. |
12 | De facto | In fact or in actual practice. | A person may exercise authority de facto even though their legal status is disputed. |
13 | De jure | According to law or legally recognised. | A person legally entitled to hold a particular position is the de jure holder of that position. |
14 | Delegatus non potest delegare | A person to whom power has been delegated cannot ordinarily delegate that power further unless authorised. | A statutory authority given a particular power may not automatically transfer that power to someone else. |
15 | Ejusdem generis | Of the same kind or class. | When specific words are followed by general words, the general words may be interpreted as referring to things of the same kind as the specific words. |
16 | Ex parte | Proceedings involving one party in the absence of another party. | A court may, in appropriate circumstances, proceed ex parte when a party fails to appear despite proper notice. |
17 | Ex turpi causa non oritur actio | No action arises from an illegal or immoral cause. | A person generally cannot rely on their own illegal conduct as the basis of a legal claim. |
18 | Expressio unius est exclusio alterius | The express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another. | Where legislation specifically mentions certain matters, it may indicate that matters not mentioned were intentionally excluded, depending on the context. |
19 | Fiat justitia ruat caelum | Let justice be done though the heavens fall. | The maxim expresses the idea that justice should be pursued regardless of the consequences. |
20 | Generalia specialibus non derogant | General provisions do not ordinarily override specific provisions. | Where a specific legal rule and a general rule appear to conflict, the specific provision may prevail in relation to the particular subject. |
21 | Habeas corpus | Literally, “you shall have the body.” | The writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge unlawful detention and requires the detained person to be produced before the court. |
22 | Ignorantia juris non excusat | Ignorance of the law is no excuse. | A person generally cannot avoid legal responsibility merely by claiming that they did not know the law. |
23 | In personam | Against a particular person. | A judgment imposing a personal obligation on a defendant is generally described as operating in personam. |
24 | In rem | Against a thing or concerning a person's status or property as against the world. | Certain proceedings determine rights or status that have effect beyond the immediate parties. |
25 | Injuria sine damno | Legal injury without actual damage. | A violation of a legal right may be actionable even when the claimant cannot show actual financial loss. |
26 | Inter alia | Among other things. | A judgment may discuss several issues, inter alia, the validity of a contract. |
27 | Lex loci | The law of the place. | The legal rules applicable to a transaction or event may depend on the law of the place where it occurred, subject to applicable conflict-of-law principles. |
28 | Lex non cogit ad impossibilia | The law does not compel a person to do what is impossible. | A legal obligation may not be enforced in a manner that requires an objectively impossible act. |
29 | Locus standi | The right or capacity to bring a legal action or appear before a court. | A person must generally have sufficient legal standing to challenge a particular decision. |
30 | Mala fide | In bad faith. | A decision taken with an improper or dishonest motive may be challenged as mala fide where the law permits. |
31 | Mens rea | The guilty mind or mental element required for certain offences. | Intention, knowledge or recklessness may constitute the required mental element depending on the offence. |
32 | Mutatis mutandis | With the necessary changes having been made. | A legal rule may apply to another situation mutatis mutandis, after making the changes required by the different circumstances. |
33 | Nemo dat quod non habet | No one can transfer a better title than they themselves have. | A person without valid ownership generally cannot give another person a better title to the property than they possess. |
34 | Nemo judex in causa sua | No one should be a judge in their own cause. | A person having a personal interest in a dispute should not decide that dispute. |
35 | Noscitur a sociis | A word is known by the company it keeps. | The meaning of an unclear word in a statute may be understood by examining the words surrounding it. |
36 | Obiter dictum | A statement or observation made by a judge that is not essential to deciding the case. | A judge may discuss a legal issue that is not necessary for the final decision; such an observation is generally considered obiter. |
37 | Pacta sunt servanda | Agreements must be kept. | Parties to a valid contract are generally expected to perform their contractual obligations. |
38 | Per se | By itself or in itself. | An act may be examined per se, meaning independently or by its own nature. |
39 | Prima facie | At first sight or on the face of it. | Prima facie evidence may establish a sufficient basis for a claim or proceeding unless rebutted. |
40 | Qui facit per alium facit per se | One who acts through another acts himself. | Under certain circumstances, an employer may be legally responsible for an employee's acts performed within the scope of employment. |
41 | Ratio decidendi | The legal principle or reasoning necessary for a court's decision. | The binding legal principle established by a higher court forms part of its ratio decidendi. |
42 | Res ipsa loquitur | The thing speaks for itself. | In certain negligence cases, the nature of the accident itself may provide evidence from which negligence can be inferred. |
43 | Res judicata | A matter that has already been judicially decided should not ordinarily be litigated again between the same parties on the same cause. | A final decision by a competent court can prevent the same dispute from being reopened. |
44 | Res sub judice | A matter is under judicial consideration. | Certain legal proceedings may be stayed when the same matter is already pending before a competent court, subject to applicable procedural rules. |
45 | Respondeat superior | Let the superior answer. | An employer may, under the law of vicarious liability, be held responsible for certain acts of an employee committed in the course of employment. |
46 | Salus populi suprema lex | The welfare of the people is the supreme law. | The maxim expresses the principle that public welfare can be treated as a fundamental consideration in governance. |
47 | Stare decisis | To stand by things decided. | Courts generally follow established judicial precedents, particularly decisions of higher courts. |
48 | Suo motu | On its own motion or initiative. | A court may take cognisance of an issue on its own initiative where legally permitted. |
49 | Ubi jus ibi remedium | Where there is a right, there is a remedy. | If a legally recognised right is violated, the law may provide a remedy for that violation. |
50 | Volenti non fit injuria | To one who voluntarily consents, no injury is done. | A person who knowingly and voluntarily accepts a particular risk may have difficulty claiming compensation for harm arising from that accepted risk, subject to the law. |
Also check: Top Expected Questions for SLAT 2027
The study of legal maxims to prepare for the SLAT 2027 legal reasoning should not just confine itself to memorising the Latin phraseology. The candidate should be able to understand the concept underlying each legal maxim and apply it to simple scenarios.
An effective way to do so would be to have a revision sheet that contains the maxim, its meaning, and an example. Keep revising this list from time to time and check your revision by covering up the meanings.
The candidate must practice legal reasoning questions for the SLAT 2027, since understanding the use of the principle is more important than knowing the name of the principle.
The ability to avoid common pitfalls will certainly help SLAT exam hopefuls in preparing for the test. Practice, revision, time management, and awareness of the examination pattern are key to success. Given below are the Common Mistakes to avoid while preparing for the SLAT 2027 Legal Reasoning section. SLAT 2027 aspirants can also practice and solve the SLAT mock 2027 test for better preparation.
Mere knowledge of the Latin maxim is not sufficient. It is essential that you comprehend the meaning of the maxim and the circumstances under which the principle is applicable.
Maxims like damnum sine injuria and injuria sine damno tend to confuse the student. You should study both and differentiate between them, understanding that there is a difference between damages without injury and injury without damages.
Your revision must not be limited to the process of studying definitions alone. Practise applying the principle to hypothetical situations.
Also check: Best Books for SLAT 2027 Preparation (Section-Wise)
Knowledge of the Top 50 Legal Maxims for SLAT 2027 can be very useful to candidates for developing a solid base for the subject of Legal Reasoning. But mere memorisation of these maxims does not hold any significant value. It is important that one understands the underlying principle and how it can be used in a particular situation.
The candidates must revise the maxims along with practice questions of Legal Reasoning and other topics included in the syllabus of SLAT 2027.
Also check: Legal Current Affairs for SLAT 2027 Aspirants
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
There is no number of maxims that will get you marks in the exam. The candidate needs to concentrate on learning the legal maxims that are commonly used and understand their applicability rather than knowing hundreds of maxims in Latin form.
Mugging up the name may help you to identify the maxim, but its meaning is very important for solving the reasoning questions.
Try to associate each maxim with a simple meaning and example. Frequent revisions through flashcards and multiple-choice question tests also help.
Legal principles and maxims can definitely play an important role in your SLAT 2027 Legal Reasoning preparation.
Learning the legal maxims will definitely help in preparing for SLAT Legal Reasoning as they embody legal principles in short form. The candidate must know them along with all the other legal reasoning topics.
On Question asked by student community
Yes, the shortlisted list of candidates for the SLAT 2026 Personal Interview (PI) has been released by the respective Symbiosis Law Schools (Pune, Noida, Hyderabad, Nagpur).
Hello,
Symbiosis International University conducts the SLAT (Symbiosis Law Admission Test) entrance examination for admission to the 5 year LLB course. Four Law Schools participate in this process. They select the students after they go through the SLAT and personal interview.
Practicing the previous year questions will help you get
Hi,
You can check the SLAT previous year question papers for Slot 1 and Slot 2 on the Careers360 website. Here's the link :
https://law.careers360.com/articles/slat-2025-question-paper
Hello
The Symbiosis Law Admission Test (SLAT) 2025 results were declared on December 26, 2024 .
While the official cutoffs for Symbiosis Law Schools (SLS) have not been released yet , previous years data suggests that the expected cutoffs for SLS Pune are approximately :
BA LLB (Hons) : 45
Among top 100 Universities Globally in the Times Higher Education (THE) Interdisciplinary Science Rankings 2026
Admissions open for B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), B.B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) and LL.B Program (3 Years) | School of Law, MRU ranked No. 1 in Law Schools of Excellence in India by GHRDC (2023)
Approved by BCI | Ranked #4 among Law Institutes in UP | NAAC A+ Accredited
Ranked 1 st among Top Law Schools of super Excellence in India - GHRDC | NAAC A+ Accredited | #36 by NIRF
4000+ Placements to date | 6000+ Students | Advanced applied research, patents, and partnerships
Admission Against Cancellation/Lapsed Seats | Pay 500 Application Fee instead of ₹1500 | NIRF Ranked 87 | NAAC A+ Grade | Upto 100% scholarship