What does mutatis mutandis mean?

When you import the provisions of one document or statute into another it is common to do so “mutatis mutandis”. The Supreme Court of Appeal in Mayo No v De Montlehu reminded us that there is an imperative nuance when you use that Latin expression. The words mean “subject to the necessary alterations” not the less strict test of fitness. The words mutatis mutandis mean that the necessary changes must be made. They are not merely permissive changes.

It is better not to use obscure Latin phrases at all.

In Mayo NO v De Montlehu a reference in section 366(2) of the Companies Act 1973 to section 44(1) of the Insolvency Act 1936 which deals with the proof of claims was interpreted so that the three month cut-off period for proof of claims in insolvency did not need to be altered and also applies to companies in liquidation.

It is better not to use obscure Latin phrases at all. Rather say “subject to the necessary changes.”