Name : Hassan Zeb

ROLL NO: 56273

Semester : LLB 4th
Subject: law of torts (improvement paper)
Submitted to: Madam Nadia
Date : 04-05-2021

Assignment topic:
No wrong without a remedy
Ubi jus ibi remedium:

Meaning:
This maxim is derived from Latin word “JUS”
which mean legal authority to demand reparation
and the word remedin right of action.

ESSENTIALS OF UBI JUS IBI REMEDIUM right

exists . Means that it is provided and protected by
court of law.

LEGAL INJURY
Only when legal injury is caused then this maxim
is actionable if not then damnum sine injuria is
applicable which means damage without legal
injury.

WRONGFUL ACTS
A wrongful act that clearly violates the legal right
of a person.

REMEDY:
Remedy is anything that redress, rectifies or
corrects something which has been done wrongly.
It is a judicial relief to satisfy parties . In case of
torts , it is in the form of damages or
compensation. Definition of
remedy:
It is such penalty when injured person is
compensated by the wrong doer against violation
Of his right through court of law is called remedy
Kinds of remedies:
Following are the two kinds of remedies
• Judicial remedies
• Extra judicial remedies

Principle:
It is latin maxim which means that “where there is
wrong their is a remedy.( There is no wrong
without remday).
The basic principle contemplated in the maxim is
that, when a person’s right is violated the victim
will have an equitable remedy under law.
The right and remedy referred in the maxim is used
in narrow sense as such rights and remedies that
are recognized by law and are enforceable at the
just discretion of the court. In this regard rights are
termed no other but “legal Right”and the remedy
as “legal remedy”.

INGREDIENTS:
.The lost must be unliquidated.

. The main remedy must be for damages.

.The nature of act varies from situation to
situation.
CASES :
MARETTI V/S WILLIAMS(1930)1b & AD 415:
Tie plaintiff had sufficient fund in his account in
the defendant’s bank. In spite of this, tie banker
had refused to honor his cheque. It was held that
the bank was liable to pay daages to the plaintff,
As his legal right is being violated .

ASHBAY V/S WHITE ( 1704)2

Ramonds 930
Tje defendant, a reputed officer in a
parliamentary election, wrongfully refused to take
the vote of plaintiff did not suffer any loss by this
refusel because the candidate for whome he
wanted to vote won in spite of that. Holt, C.J siad,
“every injuria imports a damage though it does
not cost the party one farthing”. So the defendant
was held liable to pay damages to plaintiff.
CONCLUSION:
The person whose rights are violated has a right
to stand before the court of law. This maxim does
not say that there is a remedy for every wrong.
There are many political and moral rights which
are recognized by law and the law does not
provide a remedy for that. The basic idea behind
ubi jus ibi remedium is that no wrong will be
underdressed if it can be remedied by the court.
The maxim is generally true as no right exists
without a remedy. The maxim is accepted by the
law of torts and provides a remedy in each and
every case as this doctrine of common law in
England provides a remedy for each and every
wrong.