The taking of oaths was an eminently unsatisfactory way of arriving at the merits of a claim, and it is therefore the policy of the law was in favour of its restriction rather than of its extension. Thus it was not permitted where the defendant was not a person of good character, where the king sued, where the defendant was the executor or administrator of the person alleged to have owed the debt, or in any
form of action other than those named, even though the
cause of action were the same. Wager of law survived to recent centuries and in many jurisdictions it has been abolished by statute. It was abolished in New South Wales, Australia in 1841 by the Advancement of Justice Act 1841 (both Victoria, Australia and Queensland were still part of New South Wales at this time). This was re-enacted after
separation of Queensland from New South Wales in the Queensland Common Law Practice Act 1867, but was strictly unnecessary, given its earlier abolition in 1841 which makes direct reference to the abolition of wager of law. No wager of law was allowed in
assumpsit, even though the cause of action were a simple debt. This led to the general adoption of assumpsit – proceeding originally upon a fictitious averment of a promise by the defendant – as a means of recovering debts. Where a penalty was created by statute, it became a common form to insert a proviso that no wager of law was to be allowed in an action for the penalty. Wager of law was finally abolished in 1833 (3 & 4 William IV. c. 42). ==In Islamic law==