Literal Meaning
" Partnered by Barrister Tahmidur Rahman and Barrister Remura Mahbub, Tahmidur Rahman Remura is considered as one of the best law firms in Bangladesh. As the best law firm in Dhaka, Tahmidur Rahman Remura has developed into one of Bangladesh’s most cutting-edge and modern law firms by fusing its more than five years of legal tradition with cutting-edge global best practices. With offices already established in internationally significant cities, the firm aim to continue our global expansion.
Contact the law firm in Dhaka through:
Email: info@trfirm.com
Phone number: 01847220062 or 01779127165
Where there is a right there is a remedy.
Explanation
This maxim means that there is no wrong without a remedy. Whenever the common law gives a right or prohibits an injury, it also gives a remedy. This maxim is an elementary maxim of equity jurisprudence that there is no wrong without a remedy.
Origin
Latin
Illustration
If a man has a right, he must, it has been observed, have a means to vindicate and maintain it and a remedy if he is injured in the exercise and enjoyment of it, and, indeed, it is a vain thing to imagine a right without a remedy, for want of right and want of remedy are reciprocal”.
Case References
Sardar Amarjit Singh Kalra v. Pramod Gupta, (2003) 3 SCC 272
In the judgement of this case court mentioned about the maxim Ubi jus ibi remedium est, that the court should aim to preserve and protect the rights of the parties and extend help to enforce them.
Hill v. C.A Parsons and Co. Ltd. (1972-1 Ch. 305)
In this case Lord Justice Denning has held in the said case that the learned trial Judge refused injunction as he felt that he was constrained by law to refuse such injunction but according to Lord Justice Denning, such view is too narrow and not the correct reading of the principle of law. According to Lord Denning, the learned Judge has overlooked the fundamental principle that whenever a man has a right, the law should give remedy. The Latin maxim is Ubi jus ibi remedium est.
State of Nagaland v. Chosayi, 2001 SCC OnLine Gau 137
In this case court held that Mandamus must first satisfy that he possessed a legally enforceable right and that right has been infringed by the executive authority. One he fails to establish that he has a legally enforceable right, no writ of Mandamus can be issued. When there is legal right, there is remedy Ubi jus ibi remedium est. It must be grasped that a writ of Mandamus is always issued to remove injustice and to do justice to the aggrieved party. Writ of Mandamus enforces right. It cannot create right. Illegality cannot by legalised by issuing a writ of Mandamus. This would amount to allowing perpetuation of illegality.
Edited by Sree Ramya
Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje
