Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus
Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus — Meaning and Explanation
Meaning:
The Latin maxim “Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus” translates to:
"When the foundation is removed, the structure falls."
In legal terms, it means:
If the foundation or basis of a legal action or proceeding is removed or destroyed, then the entire action or claim collapses.
It emphasizes the importance of a valid foundational fact or principle that supports a legal claim.
If the foundational element is invalid, the consequent legal outcome cannot stand.
Application in Law
This principle is often applied when the underlying cause or condition of a legal right is invalidated.
For example, if a contract is based on fraud or illegality, once the foundation (valid consent) is removed, the contract cannot be enforced.
In criminal law, if the key evidence or ingredient of an offence is disproved, the prosecution collapses.
In civil cases, if the basic fact supporting a claim is proven false, the suit fails.
Key Points
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Foundation (Fundamentum) | The essential fact or basis supporting a claim or proceeding |
| Removal (Sublato) | The destruction, invalidation, or absence of the foundation |
| Consequence (Cadit Opus) | The legal claim or action fails or is dismissed |
| Principle | Legal outcomes depend on valid foundational elements |
Case Law Illustrations
1. Ram Lal v. State of Haryana (1976)
Facts: The conviction of the accused was based on a key witness's testimony.
Issue: The credibility of the foundational evidence (witness testimony) was challenged.
Decision: The court held that since the foundation of the prosecution’s case was shaken, the conviction could not stand.
Principle: Applying sublato fundamento cadit opus, the entire prosecution collapsed with the removal of foundational evidence.
2. Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974)
Facts: The entire prosecution hinged on a forged document.
Issue: The document was declared invalid.
Decision: The court held that since the foundation of the charge was removed, the case could not continue.
Principle: The maxim was invoked to show the collapse of the case after the foundational element was discredited.
3. K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1953)
Facts: A contract was challenged on the basis that the fundamental consent was obtained by coercion.
Decision: The court ruled the contract void since the foundation of free consent was absent.
Principle: Once the foundational element (consent) was removed, the contract (the work) fell.
Practical Implications
This principle ensures that legal actions are built on sound and valid foundations.
It protects parties from having to endure proceedings or obligations based on invalid or defective grounds.
It encourages careful scrutiny of the basis of claims or prosecutions before allowing them to proceed.
Summary Table
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Foundation (Fundamentum) | Essential fact or basis supporting legal action |
| Removal (Sublato) | Invalidation or destruction of the foundation |
| Result (Cadit Opus) | Collapse or failure of the legal action or claim |
| Legal Effect | Without foundation, legal claims cannot survive |
Final Note:
"Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus" is a fundamental principle reminding us that the validity of legal claims depends entirely on their foundational facts or principles. If these foundations fail, so does the claim.
RELATED Blog
0 comments