LEGAL MAXIMS III

Animus nocendi

• In jurisprudence, animus nocendi (Latin animus, "mind" + 

gerund of noceo, "to harm") is the subjective state of mind of the
author of a crime, with reference to the exact knowledge of the
illegal content of his behaviour, and of its possible consequences.
• In most modern legal systems, the animus nocendi is required as
an essential condition to give a penal condemnation.
• The animus nocendi is usually demonstrated by the verified
presence of these elements:
1. knowledge of a law that prohibited the discussed action or
conduct (unless there exists a systemic obligation, pending on
every citizen, that considers that the law has to be known by
every adult — in this case the knowledge is presumed a priori);
2, knowledge of the most likely consequences of his action;
3 precise intention of breaking the law or of causing the verified
effects of the action.
• When the author of the crime had no animus nocendi, it
is usually considered that the crime still exists, but the
author is innocent, unless a responsibility for guilt can be
found in his conduct: the typical case of a car accident in
which a wrong or even hazardous manoeuvre causes
personal injuries to another car driver, is then managed
as a crime for the presence of injuries, yet the author will
not be prosecuted as the author of the injuries (he did
not want to hurt the other driver, thus he had no animus
nocendi), but simply as the author of a dangerous
conduct that indirectly caused the said effects.
• A particular case of animus nocendi is the voluntas
necandi.
 Voluntas necandi

• In jurisprudence, voluntas necandi (Latin
 voluntas, "will" + gerund of neco, "to kill")
describes the animus nocendi of a person
who willfully kills another human being.
• Establishment of voluntas necandi is
necessary to prove murder or voluntary 
manslaughter as opposed to involuntary 
manslaughter.
 Aut dedere aut judicare
• In law, the principle of aut dedere aut judicare (Latin for "
extradite or prosecute") refers to the legal obligation of states
 under public international law to prosecute persons who
commit serious international crimes where no other state has
requested extradition.
• This obligation arises regardless of the extraterritorial nature of
the crime and regardless of the fact that the perpetrator and
victim may be of alien nationality.
• The rationale for this principle is to ensure that there are no
jurisdictional gaps in the prosecution of internationally
committed crimes. It is, however, unusual for States to be
required to exercise this jurisdiction because often another
State party will have an interest in the matter and will apply for
extradition. In this situation that State will have priority.
• Typically offences classified as falling under
the aut dedere aut judicare principle include:
• Hijacking of civilian aircraft
• Taking of civilian hostages
• Acts of terrorism
• Torture
• Crimes against internationally protected
persons; and
• Financing of terrorism and other
international crimes
 Bona vacantia
• Bona vacantia (Latin for "ownerless goods") is a
legal concept associated with property that has
no owner.
It deals with:
• Assets of dissolved companies that have failed
to be distributed.
• Assets of dissolved unincorporated associations
 that have failed to be distributed.
• Assets of the estates of deceased persons that
have failed to be distributed due to intestacy
and a lack of known persons entitled to inherit.
• Some failed trust property.
 Corpus delicti

• Corpus delicti (plural: corpora delicti) (Latin: "body of

crime") is a term from Western jurisprudence referring
to the principle that a crime must have been proven to
have occurred before a person can be convicted of
committing that crime.
• For example, a person cannot be tried for larceny
 unless it can be proven that property has been stolen.
• Likewise, in order for a person to be tried for arson it
must be proven that a criminal act resulted in the
burning of a property.
•  Black's Law Dictionary (6th ed.) defines "corpus
delicti" as: "the fact of a crime having been actually
committed."
• Corpus delicti is one of the most important concepts in a
murder investigation.
• When a person disappears and cannot be contacted, many
police agencies initiate a missing person case.
• If, during the course of the investigation, detectives believe
that he/she has been murdered, then a "body" of
evidentiary items, including physical, demonstrative, and
testimonial evidence, must be obtained to establish that the
missing individual has indeed been murdered before a
suspect can be charged with homicide.
•  The best and easiest evidence establishment in these
cases is the physical body of the deceased.
• However, in the event that a physical body is not present or
has not yet been discovered, it is possible to prove a crime
took place if sufficient circumstantial evidence is presented
to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Delegata potestas non potest delegari

• In constitutional and administrative law, the

principle delegata potestas non potest
delegari (Latin) states that ‘no delegated
 powers can be further delegated’.
• Alternatively, it can be stated delegatus non
potest delegare, ‘one to whom power is 
delegated cannot himself further delegate
that power’.
•  This principle is present in several 
jurisdictions such as that of he United States,
the United Kingdom and India.
 Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non
qui negat

• - The
burden of the proof lies
upon him who affirms, not he
who denies.
Fatetur facinus qui judicium fugit

• -He who flees judgment

confesses his guilt.
 In jure non remota causa sed
proxima spectatur

• -In law not the remote

but the proximate
cause is looked at.
 Res ipsa loquitur
• (rayz ip-sah loh-quit-her) n. Latin for
"the thing speaks for itself," a doctrine
of law that one is presumed to be
negligent if he/she/it had exclusive
control of whatever caused the injury
even though there is no specific
evidence of an act of negligence, and
without negligence the accident
would not have happened
• . Examples: a) a load of bricks on the roof of a building
being constructed by Highrise Construction Co. falls and
injures Paul Pedestrian below, and Highrise is liable for
Pedestrian's injury even though no one saw the load fall.
• b) While under anesthetic, Isabel Patient's nerve in her
arm is damaged although it was not part of the surgical
procedure, and she is unaware of which of a dozen
medical people in the room caused the damage.
• Under res ipsa loquitur all those connected with the
operation are liable for negligence. Lawyers often
shorten the doctrine to "res ips," and find it a handy
shorthand for a complex doctrine.