Definition
An archaic Law French term meaning an award — specifically, the formal decision or determination issued by arbitrators. Found almost exclusively in early pleading formulas and historical legal texts. The phrase *nul fait agard* ("no award made") appeared as a formal traverse in proceedings where a party denied that any valid arbitration award had been rendered.
Why It Matters in Research
This term has no living independent function in modern legal practice or pleading. Researchers encountering *agard* will find it only in pre-nineteenth-century materials — primarily English common law records, early American pleading forms, and the historical dictionaries themselves. Its practical significance lies entirely in its relationship to the law of arbitration and award: when a party wished to contest the existence of an award, the technical denial took the form *nul fait agard*. Understanding this formula is necessary to read older arbitration pleadings correctly.
Researchers working in the Law Mind corpus should treat *agard* as a pointer term — its sole navigational value is directing attention to the substantive entry on AWARD. Do not expect to find *agard* used as a standalone operative term in any primary source after the early nineteenth century. The term does not appear in equity practice or civil law contexts; its home is strictly common law pleading of the Law French period.
Historical Dictionary Support
All four historical sources agree precisely: *agard* is Law French for "award," derived from *agarder* and the Latin *awarda*. Black's (both editions), Bouvier's, and Burrill's are in exact alignment on definition, and each treats the term as requiring nothing more than a cross-reference to AWARD for substantive content. Burrill is the most complete of the four, providing the derivation (*agarder*), the Latin cognate, and the illustrative phrase. Black's first and second editions reproduce the same terse entry nearly verbatim. Bouvier simply points to Burrill.
None of the historical sources offer extended treatment, and none should be expected to: the term is a lexical placeholder, not a doctrinal concept with its own analytical framework. There is no divergence among sources worth flagging.