Legal Definitions - nul tiel

Nul tiel is a Latin legal phrase that translates to "no such." In legal contexts, it refers to a formal statement or plea made by a party that denies the existence of something that has been alleged or claimed by another party. Essentially, it's a way of asserting, "What you claim exists, does not exist."

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Denying the Existence of a Document: Imagine a situation where a plaintiff sues a defendant, claiming that the defendant owes money based on a specific written agreement. The plaintiff presents what they assert is a signed contract. If the defendant believes no such contract ever existed, or that the document presented is a forgery and therefore not a valid contract, they might raise a "nul tiel" defense. This means they are formally denying the existence of the alleged valid and binding contract as presented by the plaintiff. They are not just saying they didn't sign it, but that the very document, as a legally existing agreement, is not real.

• Denying the Existence of a Legal Entity or Status: Consider a scenario where a government agency attempts to fine a person, claiming that person is the registered owner of a business that violated regulations. If the individual denies ever owning or being associated with that business, they could use a "nul tiel" argument. They would be asserting "no such ownership" or "no such business relationship" exists between them and the alleged entity, thereby denying the basis for the fine. They are denying the existence of the legal status that would make them liable.

• Denying the Existence of a Prior Legal Order: Suppose one party in a lawsuit attempts to enforce a court order from a different jurisdiction, claiming it is a valid and existing judgment that binds the other party. The opposing party might argue "nul tiel record" if they contend that the alleged judgment was never properly issued, was previously overturned, or is otherwise not a legally existing and enforceable judicial order. They are denying the existence of a valid, enforceable legal command from a court.