Nemo dat quod non habet
The Latin sentence 'Memo dat quod non habat' contains two misspellings. One is the word 'memo', which needs to be written as 'nemo'. The other is the verb 'habat', which needs to be written as 'habet'. The corrected phrase therefore is the following: 'Nemo dat quod non habet'. The word-by-word translation is as follows: 'nemo' means 'nobody'; 'dat' means [he/she/it] gives'; 'quod' means 'what'; 'non' means 'not'; and 'habet' means '[he/she/it] has'. The English meaning therefore is the following: Nobody gives what he/she doesn't have.
No one (can) give what he does not have is a legal rules, sometimes called the nemo datrule that states that the purchase of a possession from someone who has no ownership right to it also denies the purchaser any ownership title.
Nemo dat quod non habet is a notion in the Sale of Goods Act, which is rather less floridly stated in section 21:Subject to this Act, where goods are sold by a person who is not their owner, and who does not sell them under the authority or with the consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no better title to the goods than the seller had, unless the owner of the goods is by his conduct precluded from denying the seller's authority to sell.
The legal maxim "nemo dat quod non habet" translates to "no one gives what they do not have," establishing that a seller cannot transfer a better title than they possess. This rule means that if a seller has a void title, they cannot confer any rights to the buyer, making the transaction invalid. In the case of a voidable title, an innocent purchaser may acquire good title if they buy in good faith without knowledge of the seller's lack of authority, as the original owner's right to void the title does not affect the rights of subsequent bona fide purchasers. Thus, while void titles offer no protection to buyers, voidable titles can still provide valid rights to innocent purchasers.
Amor finem non habet, or Finem non habet amor, or Amor non habet finem.
This is the doctrine in Property Law that a landholder whether he be the owner of an interest in a freehold or non freehold estate can only transfer the interest that he has. For example, if a landowner owns an interest in fee simple absolute, he can devise, transfer (or his heirs will inherit) his entire estate. On the other hand, if he were to transfer a lesser quantum than his interest in fee simple, for example a life estate, then he would maintain the reversionary interest at the natural termination of that estate.
The wagon does not have horses.
An ancient Roman with nothing to say would say "Nihil habeo quod dicam". Or just not say anything.
Ut quod doesn't iuguolo mihi planto mihi validus
Quod non necat fortior facit.
De Lisle Catholic Science College's motto is 'Quod justum, non quod utile'.