Legal Definitions - non deficit jus sed probatio

The Latin phrase non deficit jus sed probatio translates to "the right is not lacking, but the proof of it." This legal principle highlights that while a person may genuinely possess a right, the ability to enforce or benefit from that right depends entirely on their capacity to provide adequate and legally acceptable evidence. In essence, a right without proof is often a right that cannot be exercised or defended in a court of law.

Here are some examples illustrating this principle:

• Verbal Agreement for a Major Purchase:

  Imagine a scenario where a business owner, Alex, verbally agrees to purchase a significant piece of manufacturing equipment from a supplier, Brenda, for a substantial sum. They shake hands and Alex even sends a small deposit. However, before a formal written contract is signed, Brenda receives a higher offer and decides to sell the equipment to someone else.

  How it illustrates the term: Alex believes he has a right to purchase the equipment based on their agreement and his deposit. However, for high-value transactions or certain types of contracts, the law often requires a written agreement to be enforceable (a concept known as the Statute of Frauds in many jurisdictions). While Alex's "right" to the equipment might feel valid to him, the lack of a written document means he lacks the legally required proof to compel Brenda to complete the sale. His right is not lacking in his perception, but the necessary legal proof is absent.

• Claiming Ownership of Inherited Property Without Documentation:

  Consider a situation where Maria's grandmother always told her that a specific antique family heirloom, a valuable painting, would be hers upon her grandmother's passing. After her grandmother dies, Maria's uncle, who is the executor of the estate, claims the painting for himself, stating it was never formally bequeathed to Maria in the will or any other legal document.

  How it illustrates the term: Maria feels she has a clear right to the painting based on her grandmother's repeated promises and intentions. However, without a specific mention in a will, a trust document, or a deed of gift, proving this right in a legal context becomes extremely challenging. The law typically requires formal documentation for the transfer of significant assets upon death. While the grandmother's intent might suggest a moral right, the absence of legal proof means Maria's claim cannot be easily enforced.

• Disputed Boundary Line Without a Survey:

  Two neighbors, David and Emily, have lived next to each other for years without issue. When Emily decides to build a new fence, a dispute arises over the exact boundary line between their properties. David insists the old, crumbling stone wall has always marked the boundary, giving him a larger yard, while Emily's new survey indicates the true line is several feet into what David considers his property.

  How it illustrates the term: David believes he has a right to the land up to the old stone wall, based on decades of common understanding and use. However, without official property deeds, a recent professional survey, or other clear legal markers, his claim relies on informal evidence. Emily's new survey provides concrete, legally recognized proof of the boundary. While David might feel his right to the disputed strip of land is not lacking, the absence of formal, verifiable proof makes it difficult to defend against the evidence presented by the survey.