Skip to content

Mandate - Law Dictionary Search Results

Research workspace

Save terms and build your research trail

A free trial unlocks notes, tags, search history, and the full AI Studio desk for judgment research.

Quod permittat

Quod permittat, a writ which, before the abolition of real actions, lay against any person who erected a building, though on his

Habeas corpora juratorum

the King's Bench and Exchequer for the same purpose. Abolished by C.L.O. Act, 1852, s. 104. Is a writ or order requiring that a prisoner be brought before a court at a stated time and place to

Cessavit

Cessavit, a writ which lay (by the Statute of Gloucester, 6 Edw. 1, c. 4, and Westminster 2, 13 Edw. 1,

Keep your definitions linked to case research

levy

levying: as a : the imposition or collection of a tax b : the seizure according to a writ of execution of real or personal property in a judgment debtor's possession to satisfy a judgment debt 2

Fine

fructus exitus et effectus legis. There are five essential parts to the levying of a fine:-(1) The original writ of right, usually of covenant, issued out of the Common Pleas against the conusor; and the pr'cipe, which

mandamus

mandamus [Latin, we enjoin, from mandare to enjoin] : an extraordinary writ issued by a court of competent jurisdiction to an inferior tribunal, a public official, an administrative agency, a

quo warranto

quo warranto [Medieval Latin, by what warrant; from the wording of the writ] 1 : an extraordinary writ requiring a person or corporation to show by what right or authority a

Capias in withernam

them, then, upon plaint being levied in the County court by the plaintiff, the plaintiff might issue this writ directing the sheriff to take goods or cattle of the defendant, to the value of those taken by

supersedeas

supersedeas [Medieval Latin, you should desist (word used in the writ)] 1 : a common-law writ commanding a stay of legal proceedings that is issued under various conditions and

Consultation

Article 233 is not an empty formality. An appointment made in direct or indirect disobedience of this constitutional mandate, would be invalid, M.M. Gupta v. State of Jammu & Kashmir, (1982) 3 SCC 412: AIR 1982 SC

  • Last »

Try the research workspace - 7 days free


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial