Leges Posteriores Priores Contrarias Abrogant
Leges Posteriores Priores Contrarias Abrogant legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Where provisions of later Act were so inconsistent with or repugnant to those of an earlier Act, that two could not stand together, the earlier would be deemed, to have been impliedly repealed by the later in point of time.
[Maximum].
Two provisions absolutely contradictory-Earlier should give way to later-Maxim: leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant.
"Leges Posteriores Priores Contrarias Abrogant", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/3137
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Leges Posteriores Priores Contrarias Abrogant"
2017 P T D 1485
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE Versus Messrs GOLDEN PEARL COSMETICS
Court: Lahore High Court (Multan Bench)P L D 1966 (W
MESSRS NAU-ASIO TRADING Co. LTD. — Petitioner Versus Sh. SAEED AHMAD, CIVIL JUDGE, III CLASS
Court:P L D 1996 Supreme Court 77
(PVT.) LTD., DERA ISMAIL KHAN and others ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others ‑‑‑ Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑ Art. 199 ‑‑‑ Locus standi to tile Constitutional petition ‑‑‑ Person who was not aggrieved by order against which Constitutional petition was sought to be‑ filed would have no locus, standi to file the same.‑‑Locus standi.1996 P L C (C
Syed RIAZ HUSSAIN and another Versus CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, ISLAMABAD and others
Court: Federal Service TribunalP L D 1970 Quetta 49
STATE‑ — Applicant Versus Syed MIR AHMED SHAH AND ANOTHER
Court: The Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958, is a special law qua the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Evidence Act and the Pakistan Penal Code. On the other hand, the Ordinance II of 1968 also, as its name Criminal Law (Special Provisions) Ordinance suggests, is a special law. In its Preamble, it is clearly stated that to make special provision for trial of certain offences in certain area of West Pakistan and to meet the special requirements of those areas, this law was enacted.P L D 1956 (W
AHMAD SAEED KIRMANI, M . L . A. — ‑Petitioner Versus (1) Ch. FAZAL ELAHI, Speaker, West Pakistan Assembly,
Court:1972 P T D 147
R. B. RAM RATTAN PREM NATH Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, U. P.
Court: Allahabad (India)2001 P T D 2982
Messrs USMANI ASSOCIATES SUB PROPRIETARY FIRM Versus CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE and another
Court: Karachi High CourtP L D 1974 Karachi 91
GHULAM HUSSAIN‑ — Appellant Versus The STATE‑ — Respondent
Court: High CourtP L D 2018 Islamabad 51
SUI NORTHERN GAS PIPELINE LIMITED, (SNGPL) through General Manager — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR (LEGAL), PRESIDENT SECRETARIAT (PUBLIC), AIWAN-E-SADAR ISLAMABAD and 2 others — Respondents
Court: High Court