A delegate cannot further delegate.
This Latin maxim means that a person to whom a power is delegated cannot further delegate that power. That person cannot sub-delegate that power to someone else. No sub-delegation can be done in a contract of principle-agent without the knowledge and consent of the principle. This principle is often used in administrative or constitutional law.
If a person has delegated ‘A’ to execute a will after his death, therefore, ‘A’ cannot further delegate this power to another person. If he does so, he will be delegating the power or authority, which was delegated to him.
The act itself does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty mind.
It is a Latin maxim, which means that for any act to be illegal in nature it must be done with a guilty mind. Hence, act done without any intention cannot be punished. Not only is the act of the accused important but also the intention of the accused to do the specific act is equally important to prove the guilt of the accused. Hence, it can be said that mere breach of law is not sufficient to constitute a crime.
Spoken before Lawsuit is brought
• Not merely before the commencement of legal proceedings, but before even the existence of any actual controversy, concerning the subject matter of the declarations. • Brought before suit, before controversy moved. • At the time when declarant had no motive to distort the truth. Brought before suit, before controversy instituted. Also, before the controversy arose.
The judges do not answer to a question of fact
These legal maxims means that, ‘The judges do not answer to a question of fact; the jury do not answer to a question of Law’. In simple words, the question of law is for the judge to decide whereas question of fact are for the jury to decide. Question of law are the questions that are decided by taking the help of law. Question of fact are the questions that are decided on the basis of evidence given by both the parties in proof or disproof of a fact.