Ubi autem dicti fori non suffecerint ad naturalem sensum vel aequitatem recurratur:
Aragonese Law legal principle contained in the first preface of the Aragonese privileges compiled in 1247, pursuant to which whenever the privilege issued to that effect is not sufficient to solve the matter or point at issue, natural reason or equity must be applied, that consequently, is expressly recognized as a source of Aragonese Law and is placed in a preferred position over Castilian Law or the one included in Castilian Law which was supplementary in Aragon before the enactment of the Civil Code.
Ubi bene ibi patri:
Where you feel good, there is your homeland. This is applied to the indifferent or selfish man, to whom his own welfare is above all other feelings, even homeland.
Ubi eadem est ratio, eadem est o debet esse juris dispositio:
Legal principle whose meaning is: for the same reason, the same legal provision. This is the expression of the method of analogical application, based on the fact that equal cases must be handled equally. Undoubtedly, it has its origins in laws 12 and 13, title 3, book 1 and law 32, title 2, book 9 of the Digest, whose comments and glosses contain ancient references to it. Such principle inspires rule 36, title 3, Entry 7: “Aun dixeron, says the Rule of the Code of the Wise King that laws must be made in accordance with common occurrences. Thus, the Ancient did not make any to regulate rare circumstances, because they thought that they could be judged through a written law applying to a similar case.” This same principle has inspired some judgments by the Supreme Court in some places.
Ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere debemus:
Where the law does not make any distinction, we do not have to make a distinction. This interpretation rule, permanently used by Justice Courts, results essential in the explanation and sense of laws, and must be strictly observed, because, as Salvador Viada and Vilaseca (1843-1904) say, establishing exceptions when the law is speaking in general terms constitutes a real arbitrariness. Law 13 stated that laws had to be straightly understood and interpreted, in the manner that results healthier and more beneficial, without losing the natural sense of words, because “knowledge of laws involves not only learning to decorate their letters, but also truly understanding them.” Nevertheless, not all authors admit the importance and significance that this legal interpretation rule involves and, thus, Felipe Sanchez Roman (1852-1916), in his work Civil Law Studies (Estudios del Derecho Civil), when citing as an example, some of the more commonly used legal interpretation rules, including the one we are analyzing, argues: “Commentators’ speculations and the use of Law schools have established a series of rules that, though revealing inventiveness and offering resources for academic and forensic discussions, and based, in some cases, on undeniable truths, lack the consistency mark any scientific principle has, and provide elements for the defense of all kinds of cases.”
Ubi non est justitia, ibi non potest esse jus:
Estoic philosophers’ maxim repeated by Marcus Tulius Cicero (106-43 b.C.) contained in his treatise De Legibus, thus attributed to this Roman jurist. It states, literally translated, that “wherever there is not justice, there is no law,” or what is the same, that the notion or possibility of the existence of law in opposition to justice is both conceived.
Ubi non est lex nec praevaricatio:
Legal postulate that means: wherever there is no law, there is no delinquency. This rule of law determines that an action, however bad it may be, cannot be a crime if the law has not previously defined it and punished it as such. It is included in the Criminal Code of 1870, when it states that “in the event a Court knows about an act it deems that should be penalized but that is not punished by the law, it will not carry out any process against him and will explain to the government the reasons why it believes that the act should be criminally penalized.” This principle has been stated in all civilized communities’ criminal legislations, according to Alejandro Groizard and Gomez de la Serna (1830-1919), in his work The Criminal Code of 1870, unified and annotated.
Ubi numerus testium non adjicitur etiam duo sufficiunt; pluribus enim elocutio duorum numero contenta est:
Whenever the number of witnesses is not established, two are sufficient, as, the plural includes number two. This interpretation rule for the application of laws which required in Roman Law, the presence of witnesses without mentioning the number of witnesses required for the efficiency and evidence of the act involved, was created by the jurist Domicius Ulpian (170-223) and included in the Digest. In his Theoretical-Legal Treatise about evidence in Civil and Criminal Law (Tratado Teórico-Legal de las pruebas en el Derecho Civil y Penal), Eduardo Bonnier (1808-1877) says that this text has suffered abuses trying to be used successfully to support the maxim Testis unus, testis nullus, which was introduced in Law during the Late Empire’s time. Those who thought that argue that “if two witnesses can be sufficient, then at least two are necessary.”
Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia:
Where Peter is, there is the Church. Phrase by Saint Ambrose (344-397).
Ubi plura nitent, non paucis offendar maculis quos parum cavet humana natura:
Where many beauties shine, some stains, from which human nature rarely escapes, do not offend. Phrase by Quintus Horatius Flaccus (65-8 b.C.) in his Art of Poetry, where he says that a good work does not lose its merit because of some lack or mole.
Ubi pugnantia inter se in testamento juberentur, neutrum ratum est:
In the event a will contains contradictory provisions, none of them will be valid. Classic rule of interpretation of testamentary provisions created by the jurist Hugo de Celso (century XVI). This hermeneutical criterion is perfectly justified, since when applying the will, it is essential to know which is the real last will of the testator, what becomes impossible when two provisions or clauses are strictly contradictory, either because of the express way of stating it, or because the fulfillment of one of them makes it absolutely impossible to comply with the other one, and there is no way, in that case, of investigating which of the two the testator would have considered the prevailing one.
Ubi societas, ibi jus:
Where society is, there is the Law. Legal philosophical maxim that states that, therefore, Law is an element without which no social life is possible.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant:
What they turn into a desert, they call it the abode of peace. Passage by Publius Cornelius Tacitus (54-120) in which Galgacus refers to the Roman’s cruelty and ambition, who colored their devastations with the spicy pretext of civilization. Ubi sunt ergo ii, quos miseros dicis?: Where are, then, those you call wretch?
Ubi verba conjuncta non sunt, sufficit alterutrum esse factum:
Rule of law created by the jurist Julius Paul (¨ -235 a.C.) and included in law 110 of the Digest, according to which, when words are not joint, the performance of one of them will suffice. This principle is of special application for the fulfillment of alternative obligations and conditional or modal institutions with such character.
Ubi verba non sunt ambigua non est locus interpretationis:
This Latin principle states that whenever words are not ambiguous, there is no room for interpretation. It is not accepted by everybody. In general, there is a tendency to consider that interpretation is an ordinary duty of all laws, whether clear or obscure. It was so expressed in a well known Roman text: Quanvis sit manifestum edictum praetoris attamen non est negligenda interpretatio ejus.
Where. This Latin adverb initiates a series of legal principles, aphorisms and axioms already known in Ancient Law and that have been adopted by Modern Law. The following are some of the main ubi:
Ubicumque sit res, pro domino suo clamat:
Wherever one thing is, it claims for its owner. Legal aphorism from Roman law, always invoked for redemption.
Ubinam gentium sumus?:
What country are we in? Oratorical exclamation by Cicero in his Catilinarian used to show the astonishment caused and the disapproval that deserves the fact of watching something that goes against moral principles or the law, especially when it involves an unjustified outrage perpetrated by means of force or public power.
Ubique et idem:
The same wherever. Latin phrase that Louis XIV directed to the marshal Enrique de la Tour d’Auvergne, Viscount of Turenne (1511-1675), expressing that he succeeded in all battles in which he took part.
Ultro citro (o) ultro et citro:
From one part and the other, mutually.
Una opinión intermedia conjetura que la apelación al pueblo sólo tenía lugar siendo éste convocado por el mismo rey para decidir las cuestiones de competencia entre éste y los Tribunales populares, en virtud de la separación entre los delitos que c
Unde venis aut quo is?:
Where do you come from or where do you go to?
Inversion in the genital or homosexual sense. Inversion-depravity shows a vice rather than a morbid case. It is also called artificial inversion and pseudo inversion. On the other hand, real inversion is a way of mental degeneration. Inversion-perversion is recognised both in men in women. In women, it offers an anomaly of congenital character as to the rare form of the retarded inversion. There is a homosexual inclination with repulsion towards the opposite sex or indifference. The congenital character of uranism is highlighted for its precociousness a long time before puberty. Once it is reached, the anomaly is revealed by unequivocal signs, searching for the adequate performance. The name uranism, created by K. Ulrichs, should only be applied to the variety of inversions-pervertions.
The city of walls.
Occupy the city.
Usque adeo, usque adeo dum:
Such a long time that, such a long time to.
It was the place reserved for the cremation of Ancient Rome’s bodies, a habit Romans acquired (as many others) from the Greek, who, on the tenth day after the death, burned the body and, for that purpose, they put together out of the city all the wood that had been obtained during the last nine days for such purpose. They built the stake, whose dimensions varied according to the importance of the dead person. Patrocle’s stake, according to Homer, was one hundred feet long by one hundred feet wide. Once the stake was prepared and near the time fixed for the cremation, the funeral procession started; the offspring usually took their parents’ bodies. Once near the pyre, those responsible for the cremation examined if everything was ready for the ceremony and, once it was confirmed, the closer relatives placed the funeral bed on the stake, which was richly decorated with hangings and flower garlands. While this was verified, animals were sacrificed to the deceased’s manes, and they had to be completely pure and black. Their fat was immediately removed and it was spread over the deceased’s body, from the head to the feet, mixing it with smelly oils and nice perfumes. Cups full of myrrh and oil and sometimes honey and wine were also placed around the funeral bed; the wine, because it was considered a friend of dead bodies, the oil, in order to ignite and consume the wood more easily. The victims’ bodies were placed next to the deceased, and when the deceased was a sovereign or prince, instead of irrational animals, slaves were sacrificed.
Usufruct. Right to use another’s property and enjoy its fruits. Justinian admits it in his Institutions saying that it is: Jus alienis rebus utendi fruendi; salva rerum substantia (right to use and enjoy another’s property without altering its essence). Thus, it involves a person who has this right because it was granted to him (usufructuarius, fructuarius); property under usufruct and that is not destroyed by use, as its substance remains unimpaired (res fructuaria), and to the owner of the property (propietarius, dominus propietatis). The usufructuary’s right involves the use of the property under usufruct (usus, utendi) and enjoyment of the fruits (fructus fruendi), being the owner only entitled to its transfer (abusus, abutendi, nuda propietas). The right to use does not include the right to enjoy; but there is right to use since it is necessary for its exercise; so, they cannot be separated in the usufructu, because, if only use were granted, there would be no usufruct and, when the right to enjoy is granted, the right to use is implied. The usufructuary must maintain the property in the same condition it was when he received it (salva rerum substantia), as he is not entitled to transfer it.
Usury. Interest collected for the money or goods under the contract of mutum or loan. It is one of the denominations given to interest in Rome. Ethimologically, it derives from usu, though not only in a literal sense, but rather in the sense of the price of use. It can be defined by saying that it represents the profit obtained for a loan in good title, but that for being excessive, it is fair. That it the exact idea; but as Antonin Lopez Pelaez (1866-1918) notes in his opuscule, The Fight Against Usury (La Lucha contra la Usura), it is used in general terms to designate any injustice in any contract, any oppression or excessive levy imposed upon others, taking advantage of their need to become richer.
Supplementary mode of the confarreatio and coemptio. It was a type of usu-capio of the wife, because if she remained under her husband’s power for a year with no interruption of three nights (trinoctio) even when marriage were null for lacking confarreatio and coemptio, it was still valid, the husband acquiring the manus over the wife. The usus differed from ordinary usurpation in that the first could be interrupted by the wife’s will. According to Cicero (106-43 b.C.), in order that the woman could get married by usus, her will was necessary, for this reason, many authors believe that it only referred to the alieni iuris woman, as such requirement was not necessary in the case of the sui iuris, who was independent.
Ut ait Cicero:
As Cicero says.
As they say.
Ut circumit sol:
As the sun goes round, go from one to the other, from one place to another.
As it had been agreed upon.
Ut inutiles oppido excedant:
The useless leave the city.
Ut ita dicam:
To put it in some way.
Ut primum occasio data est:
As soon as the opportunity arose.
Ut quisque maxime ad se facta refert, ita minime est vir bonus:
The more a man refers his acts to himself, the less honest he is.
Ut sementem feceris, ita metes:
You will collect what you have sowed.
Ut solet, ut fieri solet:
As it is usually done.
Utinam ne mortales essemus:
Might heaven wish we were not mortal.
Utinam neque ipsum neque me paeniteret:
I wish nothing happened to him or to me.
Utrum haec vera an falsa sunt?
Is that true or false?