Definition
Latin: "Which was not denied." A phrase appearing in early English legal reports to indicate that an argument, proposition, or point raised before the court was not contradicted, disputed, or controverted by the court or opposing counsel. It functions as a reporter's notation rather than a formal legal doctrine — a shorthand signal that the stated proposition passed without challenge and may therefore be taken as accepted, at least for the purposes of the proceeding recorded.
The phrase does not indicate formal judicial approval or binding precedent. It records the absence of objection, not the presence of affirmative agreement.
---
Common Confusion
QUOD NON FUIT NEGATUM is sometimes read as a mark of judicial endorsement or ruling. It is neither. The phrase signals only silence — that no denial was entered. In early English report-writing practice, reporters frequently noted whether arguments were met with resistance from the bench or left to stand. "Which was not denied" occupies a weaker epistemic position than "which was affirmed" or "which was granted." Researchers who treat it as authority for a proposition should note that unchallenged arguments in old reports carry uncertain weight and may reflect the limits of the reporter's record rather than the court's considered judgment.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This phrase belongs to the vocabulary of the old English reporters — the nominate reports of the sixteenth through eighteenth centuries — and will not appear in modern case law as a functional legal standard. Researchers encountering it should treat it as a reading aid for understanding the structure of early reports, not as a legal test or rule.
Several practical traps arise:
First, the citation in both editions of Black's to "Latch, 213" refers to John Latch's reports (covering the reign of Charles I), a nominate reporter whose accuracy and completeness are variable. Propositions marked QUOD NON FUIT NEGATUM in sources like Latch carry the additional uncertainty inherent in early reporting conventions.
Second, Black's (both editions) presents QUOD NON FUIT NEGATUM as part of a running sequence of Latin maxims and phrases, with adjacent entries for QUOD NON HABET PRINCIPIUM NON HABET FINEM and QUOD NON LEGITUR NON CREDITUR. Researchers working through Black's Latin entries should be careful not to conflate these distinct maxims, which serve entirely different functions.
Third, the phrase may appear in secondary literature discussing early common law methodology or the nature of precedent before the consolidation of modern stare decisis. In that historiographical context, it is evidence of how legal propositions were validated (or left standing) in court culture before formal doctrine of binding authority developed.
For corpus researchers: this term will surface in historical digests, treatise footnotes, and commentaries on early English reports. It is a terminus technicus of legal reporting, not substantive doctrine.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Both editions of Black's Law Dictionary define the phrase identically in substance: "Which was not denied. A phrase found in the old reports, signifying that an argument or proposition was not denied or controverted by the court." The 1st and 2nd editions align completely, which is consistent with the phrase's stable and narrow meaning — there is nothing contested in its definition across the sources.
Both editions cite Latch, 213 as the supporting authority. Neither edition elaborates on the procedural mechanics of how the notation functioned in practice or addresses the epistemic weight it should carry.
Neither edition flags the important limitation that the phrase describes reporter notation rather than judicial holding. This gap is worth flagging: a researcher relying solely on Black's might overestimate the doctrinal significance of the phrase's appearance in an old report.
No edition of Black's surveyed treats QUOD NON FUIT NEGATUM as a living doctrine or as carrying forward application in modern practice, which is accurate.
---