Ubi jus ibi remedium
Latin: Where there is a right, there is a remedy.
Also called: Where there is a right there is a remedy
Where there is a right, there is a remedy. A legal right carries with it the means of enforcing it, so its violation is actionable.
Explained
Ubi jus ibi remedium means that wherever the law recognises a right, it also provides a remedy for its violation. A right that cannot be enforced would be no legal right at all. The maxim is associated with the English case of Ashby v. White (1703), where the view of Holt C.J., later upheld by the House of Lords, was that a voter wrongly refused his vote could sue even though the candidate he favoured was elected.
Indian law gives the maxim concrete form. Article 32 makes the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights itself a fundamental right, and empowers the Court to issue directions, orders or writs; Article 226 gives the High Courts a similar and wider writ power. On the civil side, Section 9 of the CPC gives civil courts jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature unless their cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred. The Specific Relief Act, 1963 and the law of torts supply remedies such as injunction, specific performance and damages.
The maxim is closely linked to injuria sine damno: the infringement of a legal right is actionable even without proof of actual loss, because the law presumes damage from the violation of the right. It is the counterpart of damnum sine injuria, under which loss caused without infringing any legal right gives no remedy.
The maxim has limits. It protects legal rights, not moral or social expectations. A statute may bar a remedy, oust the jurisdiction of civil courts, or channel the remedy to a tribunal, and the law of limitation bars the remedy after a period while leaving the right itself alive. Examiners usually ask for the meaning in matching questions, and sometimes its link with injuria sine damno and Article 32.
What the law says
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.
(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) and (2), Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2).
Guaranteed remedy for enforcement of fundamental rights
[(1) Notwithstanding anything in article 32 ***, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including [writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.]
(2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.
[(3) Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is made on, or in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause (1), without—
High Court writ jurisdiction for rights
The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
[Explanation I].—A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit of a civil nature, notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decision of questions as to religious rites or ceremonies.
[Explanation II.—For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether or not any fees are attached to the office referred to in Explanation I or whether or not such office is attached to a particular place.]
Civil courts to try all civil suits unless barred
Example
For example, if a returning officer wrongfully refuses to let a qualified voter vote, the voter has a remedy in damages even though the result of the election is unaffected, because his legal right was infringed.
For the exam
- Meaning: where there is a right, there is a remedy.
- Associated with Ashby v. White (1703), the voter's case.
- Article 32 makes the remedy for fundamental rights itself a fundamental right.
- Section 9 CPC: civil courts try all civil suits unless expressly or impliedly barred.
- Linked to injuria sine damno; contrasted with damnum sine injuria.
15 questions in the Law Maker question bank use this maxim. Practise Legal Maxims & Jurisprudence questions
Related terms
- Injuria sine damnoThe violation of a legal right is actionable even though the plaintiff has suffered no actual loss. It applies to torts actionable per se, such as trespass and false imprisonment.
- Damnum sine injuriaActual loss or harm caused without the violation of any legal right gives no cause of action in tort.
- Locus standiThe right of a person to bring an action or be heard before a court, traditionally limited to a person aggrieved, and relaxed in India for public interest litigation.
- Habeas corpusA writ directing a person or authority holding someone in custody to produce him before the court and show lawful authority for the detention, failing which he is set free. Issued under Articles 32 and 226.
- MandamusA writ commanding a public authority, body or official to perform a public or statutory duty that it has failed or refused to perform. Issued under Articles 32 and 226.
Further reading
Checked 6 November 2026. Statutory text is quoted from the Bare Acts library, taken from India Code. See the full glossary.