Legal Definitions - pari delicto

Pari Delicto

The legal principle of pari delicto, a Latin phrase meaning "in equal fault," dictates that a court will not intervene to resolve a dispute between two parties if both parties are equally culpable in the wrongdoing that led to the dispute. Essentially, if both sides have engaged in illegal, immoral, or wrongful conduct to the same degree, the court will leave them in the position it finds them, refusing to grant relief or enforce claims for either party. This doctrine prevents individuals from profiting from their own misconduct, especially when that misconduct was shared with the opposing party.

• Example 1: Illegal Gambling Debt

  Imagine two individuals, Alex and Ben, participate in an illegal high-stakes poker game in a jurisdiction where such gambling is strictly prohibited. Alex loses a significant amount of money to Ben and writes him a check, which later bounces. Ben then tries to sue Alex to recover the gambling debt. A court would likely apply the doctrine of pari delicto. Since both Alex and Ben were equally engaged in an illegal gambling activity, the court would refuse to enforce the debt, leaving Ben unable to recover his winnings and Alex free from paying the illegal debt.

• Example 2: Fraudulent Business Scheme

  Consider two business partners, Carla and David, who conspire to create a shell company to defraud investors by selling non-existent assets. They agree to split the illicit profits. After successfully swindling several investors, Carla believes David took a larger share of the money than agreed upon and decides to sue him for breach of their partnership agreement. A court would almost certainly invoke pari delicto. Both Carla and David were equally involved in the illegal and fraudulent scheme, so the court would refuse to hear Carla's claim, leaving her without legal recourse to recover her alleged share of the ill-gotten gains.

• Example 3: Illegal Contract for Services

  Suppose Emily hires Frank, an unlicensed contractor, to perform major electrical work on her home, knowing that Frank is not legally permitted to do such work without a license. They agree on a cash payment to avoid taxes and regulatory oversight. Frank completes the work, but Emily refuses to pay the full amount, claiming the work was shoddy. Frank then sues Emily for the unpaid balance. A court might apply pari delicto. Both Emily and Frank knowingly entered into an illegal contract for services, with Emily hiring an unlicensed contractor and both attempting to evade taxes. Because both parties are equally at fault for the illegal nature of the agreement, the court might decline to enforce the contract for either party, leaving Frank unable to collect the payment and Emily potentially stuck with the work without legal recourse for its quality.