Maxim: Audi Alteram Partem
The Latin legal maxim “Audi Alteram Partem” can be translated into English as “Hear the other side” or “Listen to the other party.” This maxim embodies the principle of natural justice that requires all parties involved in a dispute to be given an opportunity to present their case and respond to the arguments made against them. Here’s a detailed explanation along with examples:
- Audi: This is the imperative form of the verb “audire,” meaning “to hear” or “to listen.”
- Alteram: This is a form of the word “alter,” meaning “the other” or “the opposite.”
- Partem: This is a form of the word “pars,” meaning “part” or “party.”
Now, let’s delve into the meaning and provide examples:
- Legal Context: This maxim is a foundational principle of procedural fairness and is a fundamental aspect of the right to a fair hearing.
- Principle: “Audi Alteram Partem” emphasizes the importance of giving both sides an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made. It ensures that no one is condemned or adversely affected without having the chance to present their case and respond to the arguments against them.
Examples:
- Court Proceedings: In a court trial, the judge must allow both the plaintiff and the defendant to present their evidence, call witnesses, and make legal arguments. Each party has the right to respond to the evidence and arguments presented by the other.
- Administrative Hearings: In administrative proceedings, individuals or entities facing adverse actions, such as license revocation or fines, have the right to present their case before the administrative body. The principle ensures a fair and impartial decision-making process.
- Employment Disputes: If an employee is facing disciplinary action or termination, the principle of “Audi Alteram Partem” requires the employer to provide the employee with an opportunity to explain their side of the story before making a final decision.
- Contractual Disputes: In disputes arising from contracts, both parties have the right to be heard and present their interpretation of the contract terms before a resolution is reached.
In summary, “Audi Alteram Partem” is a fundamental principle of justice that underscores the importance of allowing all parties involved in a legal dispute to have a fair opportunity to present their case and respond to the arguments of the opposing party.
Case Laws:
2023 MLD 103 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Mst. SAMINA BEGUM VS MUHAMMAD HAQ NAWAZ KHAN
Audi alteram partem—Scope—Principle ‘audi alteram partem’ is attracted only in a case where the opportunity of hearing is not afforded by the Court to a party to the proceedings in spite of the fact that the party was present before the Court or was a
2022 PLD 119 SUPREME-COURT
Justice QAZI FAEZ ISA VS PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN
Fair hearing, right of—Essential constituents of a fair hearing—To ensure the principle of fairness embedded in the right of hearing, the person sought to be affected must at least be made aware of the allegations made against him, upon which basis th
2022 PLD 119 SUPREME-COURT
Justice QAZI FAEZ ISA VS PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN
Scope—Even in absence of any express provision in the statute, the principle of audi alteram partem is to be read into the relevant provision and applies in proceedings where adverse action is being considered to be taken against a person or if the cont
2022 YLR 2250 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
MAHMOOD TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED VS OIL AND GAS REGULATORY AUTHORITY, (OGRA)
Arts. 10A & 25—Constitutional petition—Audi alteram partem—Gas tariff, determination process of—Redressal of grievance—Petitioners (manufacturers of textiles/allied products) alleged that they had approached the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority
2022 MLD 1081 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Ch. MUHAMMAD SADDIQUE VS The SECRETARY COOPERATIVE
Audi alteram partem—Scope—Requirement of audi alteram partem is not confined to proceedings before Courts but it extends to all proceedings by whomsoever held, which may affect a person or property or other rights of the parties concerned in dispute.
2022 PLC(CS) 322 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
BASHEER AHMED PHULPOTO VS PROVINCE OF SINDH, through Secretary Local Government Department Government of Sindh
Termination from service—Non-issuance of show cause notice—Audi alteram partem—Scope—Petitioners assailed their termination orders—Validity—Even if it was accepted that a notice was sent to the employees, ex facie the same was deficient and di
2022 PTD 662
INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN ISLAM SOAP INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LTU, LAHORE
Audi alteram partem—Scope—Order without notice is void because an act performed in disregard of the provisions of the statute and any further action taken on the basis of such void order would also be vitiated and the defects at the initial stage woul
2022 CLC 1876 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
IRSHAD BEGUM VS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Arts. 44, 4(4)(1), 4(4)(14) & 4(4)(19)—Writ petition—Security of person—Protection of property—Right to fair trial—Audi alteram partem—Scope—Where allotment in favour of the petitioners’ predecessor was cancelled without any notice, High Cou
2021 MLD 537 ISLAMABAD
SUGHRA AKRAM VS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES HOUSING FOUNDATION
Audi alteram partem—Scope—Principle of audi alteram partem i.e. providing an opportunity to the concerned party calling explanation before proceeding adversely against the person is a well-established norm and established principle of natural justice.
2021 CLC 1160 ISLAMABAD
FAST TRACKS VS FEDERAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY
Audi alteram partem—Scope—Requirement of the principle audi alteram partem is not confined to proceedings before Courts but it extends to all proceedings, by whomsoever held, which may affect a person or property or other rights of the parties in disp
2020 YLR 42 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE VS UNIVERSITY OF THE PUNJAB
Audi alteram partem—Scope—No order affecting the rights of a party could be passed without affording opportunity of hearing—Maxim was applicable to judicial, quasi-judicial and non-judicial proceedings.
2020 SCMR 1523
CONSTITUTIONAL-COURT-OF-SOUTH-AFRICA AB VS PRIDWIN PREPARATORY SCHOOL
Audi alteram partem—Representation—Scope—Opportunity to make representations would be effective only if it related to the decision to be made and if this was made clear to the affected parties.
2018 PTD 359
INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN J & P COATS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI VS C.I.R., ZONE-I, LTU, KARACHI
Audi alteram partem—Applicability—Scope—When a statute was silent regarding observance of principles of natural justice, said rule would be read into the statute as inbuilt provision—Rule must be held to be a necessary postulate in all cases, wher
2016 CLD 1097 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
MEGA STEEL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED VS GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Environmental Protection Department, Punjab
Audi alteram partem—Applicability—Scope.
2008 CLC 697 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
IMRAN AHMED KHAN VS PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence
“”Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Scope—Maxim would be applicable to all judicial and non-judicial proceedings and would be read into every statute, even if right of hearing was not expressly provided therein.
2005 PLC 24 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS LABOUR UNION VS M/s. PRECISION RUBBER PRODUCTS (PVT.) LTD and others
—-‘Audi alteram partem’—Applicability—Maxim `Audi alteram partem’ was to be read in’ every statute more particularly when the right was affected by impugned order.
2005 PTD 344
INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN I.T.As. Nos. 1730/KB to 1733/KB of 2001, decided on 1st January, 2004. VS I.T.As. Nos. 1730/KB to 1733/KB of 2001, decided on 1st January, 2004.
-Maxim: Audi alteram partem—Applicability—No evidence can be used against the assessee at his back.
2004 PLD 411 SUPREME-COURT
Messers DEWAN SALMAN FIBER LTD. and others—Appellants VS GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P.
—- Audi alteram partem—Applicability—Principle of audi alteram partem is applicable to judicial as well as non judicial proceedings and it is read in every statute as its part if right of hearing has not been specifically provided therein.
2004 PCRLJ 78 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-COURT
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD VS MUHAMMAD MUSHTAQ
—-Audi alteram partem—Discretion to deprive a person of his property has to be exercised in a judicial manner having regard to the legal maxim “”audi alteram partem”” (nobody should be condemned unheard) and the person affected has to be served with a
2003 YLR 2206 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
ABDUL KHALIQ DOOSANI VS FARIDA SABA
—- “”Audi alteram partem “”—Principle and applicability of—No man should be condemned unheard—Under principle ‘Audi alteram partem’, enshrined in our judicial system, order affecting the right of a party could not be passed without providing oppor
2003 CLC 1196 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
AHMED CLINIC VS GOVERNMENT OF SINDH
—“”Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Authorities had passed order of cancellation of plots after the same had been allotted and subleases had been executed in favour of the petitioners—No notice was issued to the petitioners before passing of or
2002 SCMR 1034 SUPREME-COURT
ABDUL HAFEEZ ABBASI VS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION, KARACHI
Audi Alteram Partem —-“”Audi alteram partem””—Application—Principle enshrined in maxim “”Audi alteram partem”” has to be applied in all judicial and non-judicial proceedings notwithstanding the fact that right of hearing has not been expressly provi
2002 PLC(CS) 1083
SUPREME-COURT ABDUL HAFEEZ ABBASI VS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION; KARACHI
Audi Alteram Partem —-“Audi alteram partem””—Application—Principle enshrined in maxim “”Audi alteram partem”” has to be applied in all judicial and non judicial proceedings notwithstanding the fact that right of hearing has not been expressly prov
2002 PLD 50 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
MUHAMMAD SHAFIULLAH VS GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
Audi Alteram Partem ae Ignorantia praesumitur ubi scientia non probatur”” (ignorance is presumed where knowledge is not proved) and “”lex neminem cogit ostendere qued nescire praesumitur”” (law compels no one to divulge that which he is presumed not to kn
2002 YLR 1870 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
ABDUL SATTAR DERO VS THE STATE
——–Audi alteram partem “” (no person shall be condemned unheard) is not confined to only judicial proceedings but extends to all proceedings affecting person or property of a party—Mere absence of provision as to notice in the statute cannot ov
2001 SCMR 1161 SUPREME-COURT
ATTIYYA BIBI KHAN VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
Audi Alteram Partem —-“”Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Admission to Medical College–Candidates for admission were the real contesting parties, and to safeguard their individual interest, they had also challenged the entitlement of the rival ca
2001 SCMR 934 SUPREME-COURT
PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION (PIAC) VS NASIR JAMAL MALIK
—- Maxim “”audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Employer, who itself hid framed Rules as well as Regulations for its domestic purposes, was bound to strictly ‘follow/adhere to the same—Deviation from such Rules and Regulations is bound to violate p
2001 PLD 568 SUPREME-COURT
ASIF ALI ZARDARI VS THE STATE
Audi Alteram Partem Audi alteram partent””—Applicability. Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, Farooq H. Naek, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in Crl.A. No. 102 of 1999).
2001 PLC(CS) 1253 SUPREME-COURT
LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR VS K.M. SOHEL
Audi Alteram Partem —-“”Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Principle of natural justice as enshrined in maxim “”audi alteram partem”” i.e. no one should be condemned unheard, is considered impliedly or expressly integral part of a statute– Even ad
2001 PLD 418 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Syed SHUJAT HUSSAIN VS CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHQRITY
Audi Alteram Partem —-“”Audi alteram partem””—Rule of—Presumption of existence of said rule in every statute—Right of an opportunity of hearing before an order is passed against a person shall be deemed to be written in every statute even if there
2001 CLC 820 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
PETROSIN PRODUCTS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Maxim has many facts, two of them are notice of the case to be met; and opportunity to explain—Rule of audi alteram partem -is universally respected and the same cannot be sacrificed at the altar of administrative
2001 PLC(CS) 361 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
NABI BUX VS GOVERNMENT OF SINDH
Audi Alteram Partem —“”Audi —“”Audi alteram partem””—No one should be condemned unheard.
2000 SCMR 907 SUPREME-COURT
ABDUL HAQUE INDHAR VS PROVINCE OF SINDH
Audi Alteram Partem “”Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Conditions and exceptions.
2000 YLR 3027 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
MUNAWAR MALIK VS THE STATE
Audi Alteram Partem —- “”Audi alteram partem “”—Principles–Availability and utilization of subsequent opportunity of hearing washes away the initial lack of such opportunity before a forum below.
1999 SCMR 2203 SUPREME-COURT
FAQIR ULLAH VS KHALIL-UZ-ZAMAN
Arts. 188 & 25—Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI, R.1—Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 306, 307 & 308—Maxim “”audi alteram partem””_-Review of Supreme Court judgment—Contentions were that order of the Supreme Court passed under Art. 184(3)
1999 CLC 1533 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
AKHTAR HASSAN AWAN VS DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
Audi Alteram Partem “”Audit alteram partem”” (No one should be condemned unheard)—Origin and concept of principles of natural justice.
1999 PTD 1358 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
SIEMENS PAKISTAN ENGINEERING CO. LTD. VS PAKISTAN
—-Ss.44, 45 & 46—Incorporation of principles of natural justice in Sales Tax Act, 1990—Maxim “”audi alteram partem”” i.e. no one should be condemned unheard, was a universally established principle of law which was applicable to both judicial and no
1998 SCMR 540 SUPREME-COURT
ZARGHUN SHAH VS SURGEON-GENERAL
—-Art. 212(3)—“”Audi alteram partem””, principle of—When not attracted—Civil servant—Dismissal from service on account of long absence from duty–Effect—Civil servant had not been able to explain his long absence for about three years—Charge
1998 SCMR 91 SUPREME-COURT
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN VS ABDUL AZIZ
Audi Alteram Partem —-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)—Maxim: “”Audi alteram partem””—Dismissal from service—Civil servant s name was included in the list of those civil servants who were required to be removed from service without aff
1998 MLD 17 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
JAWAD HABIB VS SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P., PESHAWAR
—-Art. 199—Constitutional petition—“” Maxim: “”Audi alteram partem principle of—Reversal of petitioner, an examinee, from first position to that of second without opportunity of being heard having been granted to him—Effect—Petitioner was show
1998 PLC 477 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
PAKISTAN ENGINEERING COUNCIL VS REGISTRAR, TRADE UNIONS
Audi Alteram Partem —-Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), S. 7(2)—Employees union— Issuance of certificate of registration to such union—Notice to employer before certificate of registration was issued to employees union–Necessity—
1998 PLC 19 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
NADEEM AHMED VS PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES CORPORATION
—-Art. 199—Master and servant— “”Audi alteram partem””, principles of–Employees of Corporation—Termination of services without show-cause notice and without providing opportunity of hearing to such employees–Validity—In absence of statutory ru
1998 CLC 134 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
HOECHST PAKISTAN LTD. VS MAQBOOL AHMED
Maxim: “”Audi alteram partem””—Employee of establishment—Absence of statutory rules—Effect—Fact that there were no statutory rules in employer’s firms and its relationship with its employees was that of master and servant would not negate the maxi
1997 PLC(CS) 4 SUPREME-COURT
ZARGHUN SHAH VS SURGEON-GENERAL-
—-Art. 212(3)—“”Audi alteram partem””, principle of—When rot attached–Civil servant—Dismissal from service on account of long absence from duty –Effect—Civil servant had not been able to explain his long absence for about three years—Charge
1997 PLC(CS) 356 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
AZIZ AHMAD VS CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, GUJRANWALA
Audi Alteram Partem —-“”Audi alteram partem””—Essentials—Before any order was passed affecting right and privilege of any person, it would be necessary to hear him and provide him opportunity of contradicting any material point or circumstances whic
1997 PLD 1 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
MALL SYARE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION VS MALL DEVELOPERS (PVT) LTD.
Audi Alteram Partem Audi alteram partem””—Application—Principles of natural justice requiring hearing to be granted to concerned person before being condemned would apply not only to judicial but also quasi-judicial proceedings provided that applicati
1997 MLD 2874 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
REHANA MAHMOOD VS AZAD GOVERNMENT
Audi Alteram Partem ———-“”Audi alteram partem””—Application—Opportunity of being heard—For earning a right of hearing, a person must show that he was deprived of some right vested in him—An order without jurisdiction does not create any vest
1996 MLD 123 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
MUHAMMAD SOHAIL VS GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
—-Art.199—Constitutional petition—Maxim—“”Audi alteram partem””–Applicability—Adverse action was taken against petitioner who was serving in local college as Assistant Professor in N.P.S. 20—Authority, could not advance satisfactory reasons f
1996 CLC 550 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
IRFAN NADIR VS UNIVERSITY OF PUNJAB
Regln. 20-A—Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199—Maxim: “”Audi alteram partem””—Constitutional petition—Regulation 20-A, Punjab University Calendar was based on principle of audi alteram partem which required that before taking proposed actio
1996 MLD 1964 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH VS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Audi Alteram Partem ……Audi alteram partem””—Applicability—Rule embodied in maxim “”audi alteram partem”” is well entrenched in system of law but for earning right of hearing, person concerned must show that he was deprived of some right vested in