Obiter Dicta - Things said in passing judgment.
Meaning of Obiter Dicta
Obiter dicta (plural; singular: obiter dictum) is a Latin term that literally means "things said by the way." In legal terms, it refers to statements, observations, or remarks made by a judge in the course of delivering a judgment, which are not essential to the decision of the case. In other words, they are comments made in passing, which do not form part of the binding ratio decidendi (the legal reasoning necessary to decide the case).
Ratio decidendi = the legal principle or rule on which the decision is based (binding).
Obiter dicta = extra observations, opinions, illustrations, or hypothetical situations mentioned by the judge (not binding, persuasive only).
Key Point: While ratio decidendi is binding on lower courts under the doctrine of precedent, obiter dicta are not binding, but they may be highly persuasive and influential in later cases.
Characteristics of Obiter Dicta
Not essential to the judgment: It does not decide the specific case.
Made incidentally: Usually in the form of illustrations, examples, or hypothetical scenarios.
Persuasive authority: Courts may follow it if it is considered sound reasoning.
May guide future cases: Judges sometimes discuss potential outcomes or express opinions on points not directly before them.
Example to Understand
Imagine a case where a dispute arises over a contract. The judge gives a judgment based on breach of contract, but in the judgment, he comments about tortious liability for negligence in contracts. That comment about negligence is not necessary to decide the contract dispute. This is obiter dictum.
Case Law Illustrating Obiter Dicta
R v. Howe (1987) AC 417 (UK)
Facts: The case concerned duress as a defense to murder.
Observation: The House of Lords held that duress is not a defense to murder.
Obiter Dictum: The court also commented on whether duress could apply to attempted murder. This statement was not essential to the decision, so it was obiter dictum, though persuasive in later cases.
Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Ltd. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly (1986) 3 SCC 156 (India)
Facts: The case dealt with the scope of administrative discretion and fairness in employment decisions.
Observation: The Supreme Court made remarks about general principles of natural justice in administrative actions.
Obiter Dictum: These remarks were not necessary to the final decision but provided guidance for future cases on natural justice.
Importance of Obiter Dicta
Guidance for future cases: Judges often refer to it when the legal issue arises later.
Legal reasoning development: Helps develop the law in areas not directly decided in the case.
Persuasive in higher courts: Although not binding, higher courts sometimes adopt the principles discussed obiter.
In short:
Obiter dicta are statements made by judges in passing, not forming the core reasoning (ratio) of the judgment. They are not legally binding but can be influential and persuasive in shaping future law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments