Legal Definitions - ad consimiles casus

ad consimiles casus

This Latin phrase translates to "to similar cases". Historically, it refers to the principle of extending existing legal rules, remedies, or procedures to new situations that are not directly covered by current law but bear a strong resemblance to established cases. It reflects a fundamental aspect of common law development, allowing the legal system to adapt and evolve by applying existing principles through analogy.

Here are some examples illustrating this concept:

• Historical Development of Writs: In medieval English law, specific legal actions were initiated through "writs," which were formal commands from the King. If a new type of grievance arose for which no existing writ directly applied, legal clerks, acting ad consimiles casus, would draft a new writ by adapting the language and principles of an existing writ that addressed a similar type of wrong. For instance, if a writ existed for direct physical trespass onto land, but a new situation involved indirect harm to land (like diverting a stream to flood it), a new writ could be created based on the principles of the trespass writ, extending the remedy to this similar, but not identical, scenario.

• Modern Intellectual Property Law: Imagine a new form of digital creation, such as a unique algorithm or an AI-generated artwork, emerges. Existing copyright laws were primarily designed to protect traditional works like books, music, and paintings. When courts are asked to determine how to protect the rights of creators of these novel digital assets, they might look ad consimiles casus to the principles established in traditional copyright law. They would consider how the core concepts of originality, authorship, and fixation, which apply to traditional works, could be analogously applied to these similar, yet distinct, forms of creative expression.

• Consumer Protection in E-commerce: Consider a new type of online subscription service that uses complex, hidden terms to automatically renew at an inflated price, making cancellation extremely difficult. While specific statutes might exist to protect consumers from deceptive practices in traditional retail or service contracts, they might not explicitly cover this exact digital scenario. Regulators and courts, acting ad consimiles casus, could apply the underlying principles of existing consumer protection laws (e.g., requirements for clear disclosure, fair dealing, and ease of cancellation) to this new online context, extending the protective framework to address similar deceptive practices in the digital realm.