VocabuLaw

Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio

What is it and what does it mean?

Description of the legal term Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio:

Ex turpi causa non oritur actio is a Latin legal maxim that translates roughly as “from a dishonorable cause, an action does not arise”. This principle is entrenched in English law and holds that a court will not assist a claimant if the claim arises from their own illegal or unethical actions. The rationale for this maxim is that it would be contrary to public policy to allow a litigant to profit or benefit from their wrongdoing; it effectively prevents individuals from seeking legal remedies if their case is founded on illegal or immoral activities.

Under this doctrine, courts will not enforce a contract if it involves illegal activity, nor will they award damages if to do so would effectively sanction that activity. The scope of the maxim is not absolute, and judges have discretion in applying it, considering the seriousness of the illegal act, the centrality of the illegality to the transaction, and the purpose of the prohibition violated.

There are two primary functions of this maxim. Firstly, it upholds the doctrine of public policy, which underpins the legal system by refusing to support transactions that would be harmful to society. Secondly, it serves as a deterrent to those who might otherwise engage in unlawful activities with the expectation that they can still seek legal redress if they are wronged during those activities.

The maxim is not to be confused with in pari delicto, another legal doctrine meaning “in equal fault”, where two parties are equally at fault; the ex turpi causa rule specifically involves one party attempting to base their claim on their own immoral or illegal act.

Despite its importance, the application of the maxim can sometimes lead to perceived harshness. It can potentially deny relief to those who have suffered genuine harm. Nevertheless, the courts have shown flexibility, as the justice system is reluctant to leave victims without any remedy. Decisions often involve balancing the public policy benefits of upholding the maxim against the particular injustices that might result from its strict application.

Legal context in which the term Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio may be used:

One example of the application of the ex turpi causa non oritur actio maxim is in the case of personal injury claims. Imagine a situation where two burglars are committing a burglary, and one of them is injured because the other has negligently handled their equipment. In such a case, the injured party cannot claim damages for their injuries because the injury occurred in the context of committing a crime. Here, the maxim directly precludes the claim because the claimant would be seeking compensation that arises from their involvement in an illegal act.

Another common scenario arises in insurance cases. If an individual seeks to claim under an insurance policy for a loss that occurred while they were committing a criminal act, for instance, if a driver has an accident while driving under the influence of alcohol, the maxim may be invoked by the insurer to deny the claim. The insurer’s argument would be that the claim arises from conduct that the law seeks to deter, thereby bringing the maxim into effect.

The importance of the ex turpi causa non oritur actio maxim in British jurisprudence cannot be understated. It reflects a moral and legal stance that the courts should not be seen to condone illegality. It also serves a vital function of deterrence, discouraging individuals from engaging in illegal activities by denying them the chance to seek legal redress from such acts. While it can lead to harsh outcomes in certain cases, the underlying principle is aimed at preserving the integrity of the legal system and upholding the concept of public policy, which deems certain conduct as damaging to the social fabric.

This website is for informational purposes only and may contain inaccuracies. It should not be used as a substitute for professional legal advice.