When there is uncertainty about the value of a variable before a process has taken place, the estimate of this variable is called ‘ex-ante’. Ex ante is Latin for ‘beforehand’. When the process is finished and the variable known, the formerly uncertain variable is called ex post (after the fact).

Ex contractu describes a claim, duty or liability arising from a contract, as opposed to one arising in tort or delict (ex delicto). It is a Latin descriptive expression used in case law and legal writing across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, rather than a statutory term.An action ex contractu is founded on an enforceable agreement and usually requires privity between claimant and defendant. Limited statutory exceptions allow third‑party enforcement in England & Wales (Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999), Northern Ireland (Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act (Northern Ireland) 1999) and Scotland (Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) (Scotland) Act 2017); Irish law remains largely governed by the common‑law privity rule.Typical remedies are a claim in debt or damages for breach assessed by the expectation interest, with orders such as specific performance or injunction available in appropriate cases. Contractual defences and exclusion or limitation clauses are engaged.The classification has practical consequences: primary time bars for ex contractu claims are six years for simple contracts and twelve years for deeds/specialties in England & Wales, Northern Ireland and Ireland; and five years’ negative prescription for most contractual obligations in Scotland.

Ex delicto describes rights, obligations or claims that arise out of a wrongful act, usually a civil wrong (tort or delict), rather than from a contract (ex contractu). In practice, it is used to distinguish liabilities based on breaches of general legal duties (such as negligence, nuisance or trespass) from those based on agreed contractual obligations. The term is Latin and largely descriptive; it is not generally defined in UK or Irish legislation, but appears in case law and legal commentary across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Usage is broadly consistent across these jurisdictions. In Scots law, the parallel concept is “delict”, and ex delicto is sometimes used in academic and judicial analysis to contrast delictual and contractual remedies, limitation periods and jurisdictional rules. In common law jurisdictions within the UK and Ireland, it frequently appears in discussions of conflict of laws, limitation, insurance coverage, contribution between wrongdoers, and characterisation of claims for procedural purposes. Understanding whether a claim is ex delicto or ex contractu can affect applicable limitation periods, choice of law, measure of damages, availability of contribution, and liability insurance response.

To clarify who receives the dividend on a share that is sold around the time the dividend is due, a date is fixed when a share goes ex dividend. Anyone buying after this date will not receive the dividend. A share price will normally fall by the amount of the dividend on the day that it goes ex dividend. Compare with cum dividend.

On the face of it. Generally something that is correct on the face of it is presumed to be correct until the contrary is established.

By virtue of office.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The Court of Appeal held it was not fair for administrators to refuse to correct a contract based on a common mistake as to the value of proof of debt. Although the sum due had been determined by deed, the administrators should not have relied upon their contractual rights but should have agreed to increase the debt as admitted to proof. The creditor was entitled to seek relief both under paragraph 74 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), and the principle in Ex parte James. Written by Sarah Clarke, barrister at Hardwicke Chambers.

Personal Injury analysis: What must a defendant do to rely on the doctrine of ex turpi causa in cases where criminal joint enterprise is argued? Tristan Hallam, partner in the clinical negligence and personal injury team at Penningtons Manches, considers the intricacies of the decision in Wallett (on her own behalf and on behalf of the dependants of Ian Hill (deceased)) v Vickers.

A doctrine that a person will not be able to pursue a cause of action if it arises from his own illegal act.

Law360, London: The High Court found on 1 August 2025 that the former chairman of AllSaints was in contempt of court for breaching an order to stop claiming any rights to or interest in shares in the high street fashion chain.

Law360: A California federal jury on 6 June 2024 acquitted former Autonomy CEO Michael Lynch and former finance Vice President Stephen Chamberlain of criminal fraud and conspiracy charges following an 11-week trial over allegations that the two conned HP into overpaying billions for the British tech company.

Law360: Mike Lynch wants the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to turn over information it holds on him over concerns that US authorities sought international assistance to avoid running out of time to charge him for fraud, according to particulars of the extradited entrepreneur's legal claim against the UK agency.