Legal Definitions - without this, that

The legal phrase "without this, that" (often appearing in its Latin form, absque hoc) is used in legal pleadings to introduce a denial of a specific, material fact that an opposing party has alleged. It essentially means: "without this particular fact being true, then that consequence or claim (which the other party is relying on) would not logically follow or be valid." It's a way of asserting that a crucial element of the opposing party's argument is false, and if that element is false, their entire claim fails.

• Example 1: Contract Dispute

  Imagine a software developer sues a client, claiming the client owes them payment for a completed project. The client responds by stating that the developer never actually delivered the final, functional software as agreed upon in their contract. The client's defense could be framed as: "without the delivery of the completed, functional software, the client does not owe the developer the final payment."

  Explanation: Here, "this" refers to the delivery of the completed, functional software. The client is denying that "this" occurred. "That" refers to the obligation to make the final payment. The client's argument is that if "this" (delivery) didn't happen, then "that" (payment obligation) doesn't exist.

• Example 2: Personal Injury Claim

  Consider a situation where a pedestrian sues a cyclist, alleging that the cyclist's reckless riding on the sidewalk caused them to fall and sustain injuries. The cyclist admits they were on the sidewalk but argues that the pedestrian was looking at their phone and stepped directly into their path, making the fall unavoidable regardless of the cyclist's speed or location. The cyclist's defense might be: "without the cyclist's reckless riding being the direct cause of the pedestrian's fall, the cyclist is not liable for the pedestrian's injuries."

  Explanation: In this scenario, "this" is the cyclist's reckless riding being the direct cause of the fall. The cyclist is denying that their actions directly caused the injury. "That" is the cyclist's liability for the injuries. The cyclist is asserting that if "this" (direct causation by their recklessness) is not true, then "that" (liability) cannot be established.

• Example 3: Property Ownership Dispute

  Suppose two neighbors, Mr. Smith and Ms. Jones, are disputing the boundary line between their properties. Mr. Smith claims a strip of land belongs to him based on a survey he commissioned. Ms. Jones challenges this, asserting that Mr. Smith's survey is fundamentally flawed because it relies on an outdated and inaccurate benchmark. Ms. Jones's argument could be: "without a legally sound and accurate survey, Mr. Smith cannot definitively claim ownership of the disputed strip of land."

  Explanation: Here, "this" is a legally sound and accurate survey. Ms. Jones is denying that "this" exists or is valid. "That" is Mr. Smith's definitive claim of ownership. Ms. Jones is arguing that if "this" (a valid survey) is not present, then "that" (Mr. Smith's ownership claim) cannot be upheld.