Skip to main content

ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA

 


ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA 


ORIGIN AND DEFINITION


ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA IS AN OFFICIAL TERM OF LATIN ORIGIN. ACTIO MEANS 'ACTION / ACTIONS, PERSONAIS MEANS 'PERSONAL', MORITUR MEANS 'DEATH', CUM MEANS 'NO' AND PERSONA MEANS 'PERSON' AND THE PHRASE LITERALLY MEANS, PERSONAL RIGHTS / CAUSE OF ACTION DIES WITH A PERSON.



DEFINITION

CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF LEGAL REASONS FOR ACTION CANNOT BE BROUGHT AFTER A PERSON'S DEATH. IT MEANS THAT THE PERSONAL CAUSE OF THE ACTION DIES WITH THE PERSON AND CANNOT BE EXECUTED ON HIS OR HER LEGAL HEIRS OR OTHER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES.



APPLICATION

UNDER NORMAL LAW, ANY DAMAGE DONE TO A PERSON OR PROPERTY HAS BEEN ACQUIRED ONLY IN THE FORM OF DAMAGES AND THEN THE PERSONAL RIGHT TO ACTION OF THE INJURED PERSON HAS BEEN TERMINATED BY THE DEATH OF THE INJURED PERSON. FOR EXAMPLE, OFFENSIVE SUITS.

THE PRINCIPLE APPLIES TO PRIVATE NATURAL CONTRACTS. THEY ALSO DIE THE DEATH OF ANY CONTRACT PARTY. FOR EXAMPLE, PROMISE TO GET MARRIED, PAINT A PICTURE, ETC. SUCH AGREEMENTS ARE IN VAIN IF ANY PARTY DIES.

DIFFERENT FROM MAXIM


CONTRACTS: APART FROM PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS, THE MAXIM ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA DOES NOT APPLY TO OTHER TYPES OF CONTRACTS AND IN THOSE CASES, THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED ORGANIZATION WILL BE PROSECUTED FOR DOING THE SAME.


IMPROPER COUNSELING OF A TORTFEASOR ESTATE: IN THE EVENT THAT A PERSON UNFAIRLY OCCUPIES AND DIES BEFORE THE PROPERTY IS RESTORED, THE PERSON WHOSE PROPERTY HAS BEEN IMPROPERLY DISTRIBUTED WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE DECEASED REPRESENTATIVES.


ILLUSTRATION TO EXPLAIN 


A, THE FAMOUS SINGER SIGNS A SINGING CONTRACT AT THE B RECEPTION CEREMONY IN JULY. A MET WITH AN ACCIDENT IN JUNE AND WAS UNABLE TO ARRIVE. IN THIS CASE, B CANNOT ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AGAINST A'S LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES.

A, IMPROPERLY GIVES PLACE B. A DIES LATER. B CAN EXERCISE HIS RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF A.


CRIMINAL CASE RULES


IN THE CASE OF HAMBLY V. TROTT IS KNOWN AS ONE OF THE INITIATIVES BEHIND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS SYSTEM. IT IS IN THIS CONTEXT THAT THE POLICY DOES NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF CONTRACTS (OTHER THAN THOSE INVOLVING PERSONAL SERVICE OR THE ABILITY OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER) AND UNFOUNDED ENRICHMENT.


IN THE CASE OF GIRJA NANDINI AND ORS. V. BRIJENDRA NARAIN CHAUDHARY, THE LEGAL TERM WAS REFERRED TO AND IT WAS HELD THAT THE TERM ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA HAS LIMITED FUNCTIONALITY.


CONCLUSION 

THIS LEGAL MAXIM  IMPLIES THAT IF  A PERSON IS DEAD, HIS CONDUCT OF TORT AND CONTRACT TERMINATES AND ALL HIS DUTIES AND REMEDIES ARE DESTROYED. STILL, IN DUE COURSE OF TIME, THE RULE WAS REVERSED BY THE LAW REFORMED (MISC. PROVS.) ACT, 1934 – “ ON THE DEATH OF ANY PERSON-ALL CAUSES OF CONDUCT VESTED IN HIM SHALL SURVIVE FOR THE BENEFIT OF HIS ESTATE”. THEREFORE, ALL CAUSES OF CONDUCT IN TORT, SAY FOR DEFAMATION AND THE CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR PENALTY SURVIVED ARE DEPARTED. DEFAMATION , ATTACK OR ASSAULT, AND PARTICULAR DAMAGES ARE THREE EXCEPTIONS OF THIS LEGAL MAXIM . IT IS JUST AND A PRINCIPLE USED IN THE CASES OF LAW OF TORTS IN COMMON LAW . 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree