Ut res magis valeat quam pereat
Latin: That the thing may rather have effect than be destroyed
Also called: Rule of effective construction, Principle of effectiveness
A rule of interpretation: where a provision or document can be read in two ways, the court prefers the reading that gives it effect over one that makes it void, futile or meaningless.
Explained
Ut res magis valeat quam pereat means that it is better for a thing to have effect than to be made void. It is a rule of construction applied to statutes, constitutions, contracts and other instruments. It has no single statutory home in India; courts apply it as part of the general principles of interpretation. Where the words used are capable of two meanings, one of which would make the provision workable and the other would render it nugatory, ineffective or absurd, the court adopts the former.
The rule rests on the presumption that the legislature does not enact, and parties do not write, words that are meant to have no effect. It therefore supports several related techniques. The court avoids a construction that makes any part of a statute surplusage or otiose. It prefers a reading that keeps a statute within constitutional limits, which is the basis of reading down and of the presumption of constitutionality. In contracts it leads the court to uphold an agreement where possible, for example by giving a reasonable meaning to a loosely drafted clause rather than holding the clause void for uncertainty.
The maxim has limits. It cannot be used to rewrite a provision, supply words the legislature deliberately omitted, or save a provision whose plain language admits only one meaning. It is a tool for choosing between possible readings, not a licence to legislate. It sits alongside other aids, such as the mischief rule, harmonious construction and the rule that a statute is to be read as a whole, and it often overlaps with them, since a harmonious reading of two provisions is usually also the reading that keeps both effective.
In exams the maxim is tested mainly through its meaning and its other names. Aspirants should be able to identify it as the rule of effective or beneficial construction, contrast it with literal construction, and explain how it supports reading down and the presumption of constitutionality.
Example
For example, if a clause in a lease can be read either as a valid renewal option or as an unenforceable vague promise, the court leans to the reading that makes it a valid and operative renewal option.
For the exam
- Meaning: it is better for a thing to have effect than to be made void.
- Also called the rule of effective construction or principle of effectiveness.
- Courts avoid readings that make a provision otiose, futile or meaningless.
- Supports reading down and the presumption of constitutionality.
- Cannot be used to rewrite plain words or add omitted words.
1 question in the Law Maker question bank uses this maxim. Practise Legal Maxims & Jurisprudence questions
Related terms
- Ejusdem generisA rule of interpretation: where general words follow specific words of a distinct class, the general words are read as limited to things of the same class as the specific words.
- Noscitur a sociisA word is known by the company it keeps. The meaning of a doubtful word in a statute may be gathered from the words associated with it.
- Generalia specialibus non derogantA rule of interpretation: where a general provision and a special provision deal with the same matter, the special provision prevails and the general one does not override it.
- Expressio unius est exclusio alteriusA rule of construction: when a statute or document expressly mentions certain things, other things of the same kind not mentioned are presumed to be excluded.
- Ultra viresBeyond the powers. An act, rule or law made in excess of the authority conferred by the Constitution, the parent statute or a company's memorandum is ultra vires and void.
Checked 6 November 2026. Statutory text is quoted from the Bare Acts library, taken from India Code. See the full glossary.