QUI DAT FINEM - The Law Mind Legal Dictionary

QUI DAT FINEMAuthored

The Law Mind • 841 words

Definition

A Latin maxim meaning "he who gives the end" or "he who grants the purpose." The full form of the maxim is typically rendered as *qui dat finem, dat media ad finem necessaria* — "he who grants the end grants the means necessary to that end." The principle holds that when a legal authority, instrument, or grantor confers a power, right, or obligation directed toward a specific purpose, the means reasonably necessary to accomplish that purpose are implicitly conferred along with it. In practical application, the maxim supports implied powers and implied grants: if a right or duty is expressly given, the law will read in whatever ancillary authority is required to make that right or duty effective.

Common Confusion

*Qui dat finem* (implied grant of means) is conceptually distinct from *expressio unius est exclusio alterius* (the expression of one thing excludes others). The two maxims can point in opposite directions when applied to the same instrument: *qui dat finem* counsels reading in implied powers, while *expressio unius* counsels against doing so. Courts and treatise writers have long recognized this tension. Researchers should not assume that either maxim controls without examining how the particular jurisdiction or era weighted each canon.

Why It Matters in Research

This maxim is primarily encountered in older common law treatises and legal dictionaries rather than in modern statutory or case law, though the underlying principle survives vigorously in doctrines of implied powers, implied easements, and statutory construction. Researchers working in historical corpus materials should be aware of several navigational points.

First, the maxim appears in fragmentary form across historical dictionaries. Black's 2nd Edition captures related maxims in sequence — *qui adimit medium dirimit finem* ("he who takes away the mean destroys the end") appears in the same cluster and is conceptually the inverse of *qui dat finem*: one establishes implied grant, the other establishes implied destruction of a right. Researchers encountering either maxim in historical sources should read them together, as courts and treatise writers often invoked them as paired propositions.

Second, the doctrine embedded in *qui dat finem* feeds directly into modern implied powers analysis. In constitutional and administrative law, the principle that express grants of authority carry with them the implied powers necessary for their execution is a foundational concept — traceable in part to this maxim through Coke and Blackstone. Researchers tracing the intellectual lineage of implied powers in American constitutional thought will find this maxim appearing in the background of early treatise arguments even where it is not cited by name.

Third, in property law, the principle underlies implied easement doctrine: a grantor who conveys land for a specific use implicitly grants whatever access or ancillary rights are necessary to accomplish that use. Historical deeds cases often invoke the spirit of *qui dat finem* without naming it, making the maxim a useful conceptual key when interpreting older property instruments in the corpus.

Fourth, be alert to truncation in historical sources. Latin maxims were frequently quoted in abbreviated form or embedded mid-sentence in older texts. The maxim may appear as *qui dat finem* alone, without the *dat media* clause, requiring the researcher to recognize the incomplete form and reconstruct its full meaning from context.

Historical Dictionary Support

Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) does not carry a standalone entry for *qui dat finem* in the surviving text fragment provided, though the surrounding entries confirm the dictionary's method of cataloguing Latin maxims in alphabetical sequence. The adjacent entries — *qui acquirit sibi acquirit heredibus* and *qui adimit medium dirimit finem* — are instructive. *Qui adimit medium dirimit finem* is glossed directly in Black's with a plain-English paraphrase drawn from Coke on Littleton: "he that deprives a man of the mean by which he ought to come to a thing deprives him of the thing itself." This gloss, citing Littleton § 237, establishes that early common law treatise writers treated the relationship between means and ends as a coherent legal doctrine, not merely a rhetorical flourish.

The maxim *qui dat finem dat media* appears in Broom's *Legal Maxims* and in Trayner's *Latin Maxims and Phrases*, both standard shelf sources for the historical legal dictionary corpus. Trayner renders it straightforwardly as a principle of implied powers in grant and statutory instruments. Broom gives it somewhat broader treatment, connecting it to the general canon of construction that an instrument should be read to give effect to its evident purpose.

Historical sources are largely in agreement on the maxim's core meaning. The main limitation of the dictionary corpus is that no source develops its application in sustained depth — the maxim is noted and glossed but not analyzed through extended case discussion. For deeper treatment, researchers should move from the dictionary shelf to treatise sources on statutory interpretation and implied grants.

QUI DAT FINEMmain

Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) • 1910

-* Qui acquirit sibi acquirit heredibus. He who acquires for himself acquires for his heirs. Tray. Lat. Max. 496. Qui adimit medium dirimit finem. He who takes away the mean destroys the end. Co. Litt. 16la. He that deprives a man ot the mean by which he ought to come to a thing deprives him of the thing itself. Id; Litt. § 237. Qui aliquid statuerit, parte inaudita altera squum licet dixerit, haud squum feoerit. He who determines any matter without hearing both sides, though he may have decided right, has not done justice. 6 Coke, 52a; 4 Bl. Comm. 283. Qui alterius jure utitur, ecodem jure uti debet. He who uses the right of another ought to use the same right. Poth. ‘Traité De Change, pt. 1, c. 4, § 114; Broom, Max. 473. Qui approbat non reprobat. He who approbates does not reprobate, [f. e., he cunnot both accept and reject the same thing.] Qui bene distinguit bene docet. 2 Inst. 470. He who distinguishes well teaches well. Qui bene interrogat bene docet. He who questions well teaches well. 3 Bulst. 227. Information or express averment may be effectually conveyed in the way of interrogation. Id. Qui cadit a syllaba cadit a tota causa. He who fails in a syllable fails in his whole cause. Bract. fol. 211. Qui concedit aliquid, concedere videtur et id sine quo concessio est irrita, sine quo res ipsa esse non potuit. 11 Coke, 52. He who concedes anything is considered as conceding that without which his concession would be void, without which the thing itself could not exist. Qui concedit aliquid concedit omme id sine quo concessio est irrita. He who grants anything grants everything without which the grant is fruitless. Jenk. Cent. p. 32, case 63. Qui confirmat nihil dat. He who confirms does not give. 2 Bouv. Inst. no. 2069. Qui contcemnit preceptum contemnit precipientem. He who contemns (contemptuously treats] a command contemns the party who gives it. 12 Coke, 97. Qui cum alio contrahit, vel est, vel esse debet non ignarus conditionis ejus. He eho contracts with another either is or ought to be not ignorant of his condition. Dig. 50, 17, 19; Story, Confl. Laws, § 76. Qui dat finem, dat media ad finem necessaria. He who gives an end gives the QUI DESTRUIT MEDIUM 979 means to that end. Commonwealth v. Andrews, 3 Mass. 129. Qui destruit medium destruit finem. He who destroys the mean destroys the end. 10 Coke, 510; Co. Litt. 16la; Shep. Touch. 342, Qui doit inheriter al pere doit inheriter al fits. He who would have been heir to the father shall be heir to the son. 2 BL Comm. 223; Broom, Max. 517. Qui evertit causam, evertit causatum futurum. He who overthrows the cause overthbrows its future effects. 10 Coke, 51. Qui ex damnato coitu nascuntur inter liberos non computentur. Those who are born of an unlawful intercourse are not reckoned among the children. Co. Litt. 8a; Broom, Max. 519. Qui facit per alium facit per se. He who acts through another acts himself, [#. ¢., the acts of an agent are the acts of the principal.} Broom, Max. 818, et seq.; 1 Bl. Comm, 429; Story, Ag. § 440. Qui habet jurisdictionem absolvendi, habet jurisdictionem lLlgandi. He who has jurisdiction to loosen, has jurisdiction to bind. 12 Coke, 60. Applied to writs of prohibition and consultation, as resting on a similar foundation. Id. . Qui heret in litera heret in cortice. He who considers merely the letter of an instrument goes but skin deep into its meaning. Co. Litt. 289; Broom, Max. 685. Qui ignorat quantum solvere debeat, mon potest improbus videre. He who does not know what he ought to pay, does not want probity in not paying. Dig. 50, 17, 90. Qui in jus dominiumve alterius succedit jure ejus uti debet. He who succeeds to the right or property of another ought to use his right, [#. e., holds it subject to the same rights and liabilities as attached to it in the hands of the assignor.] Dig. 50, 17, 177; Broom, Max. 473, 478. Qui in utero est pro jam nato habetur, quoties de ejus commodo queritur. He who is in the womb is held as already born, whenever a question arises for his benefit. Qui jure suo utitur, nemini facit injuriam. He who uses his legal rights harms no one. Carson v. Western R. Co., 8 Gray (Mass.) 424. See Broom, Max. 379. Qui jussu judicis aliqnod fecerit non widetur dolo malo fecisse, quia parere mecesse est. Where a person does an act ‘QUI NON PROHIBET by command of one exercising judicial authority, the law will not suppose that he acted from any wrongful or improper motive, because it was his bounden duty to obey. 10 Coke, 76; Broom, Max. 93. Qui male agit odit lucem. He who acts badly hates the light. 7 Coke, 66. Qui mandat ipse fecissi vidotur. He who commands [a thing to be done] is held to have done it himself. Story, Bailm. § 147. Qui melius probat melius habet. He who proves most recovers most. 9 Vin. Abr. 235. Qui molitur insidias in patriam id facit quod insanus nauta perforans navem in qua wehitur. He who betrays his country is like the insane sailor who bores a hole in the ship which carries him. 3

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

Subscribe Encyclopedia Sign In