An obiter dictum (plural obiter dicta, often referred to simply as dicta), Latin for a statement "said by the way", is a remark or observation
made by a judge that, although included in the body of the court's opinion, does not form a
necessary part of the court's decision. In a court opinion, obiter dicta include, but are not limited to, words
"introduced by way of illustration, or analogy or argument."[1] Unlike the rationes decidendi, obiter dicta
are not the subject of the judicial decision, even if they happen to be correct statements of law. Under the doctrine of
stare decisis, statements constituting obiter dicta are therefore not
binding, although in some jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, they can be
strongly persuasive.
An example of an instance where a court opinion may include obiter dicta is where a court rules that it lacks
jurisdiction to hear a case or dismisses the case on a technicality. If the court in such a
case offers opinions on the merits of the case, such opinions may constitute obiter dicta. Less clear-cut instances of
obiter dicta occur where a judge makes a side comment in an opinion to provide context for other parts of the opinion, or
makes a thorough exploration of a relevant area of law. Another example would be where the judge, in explaining his ruling,
provides a hypothetical set of facts and explains how he or she believes the law would apply to those facts.
In reaching decisions, courts sometimes quote passages of obiter dicta found in the texts of the opinions from prior
cases, with or without acknowledging the quoted passage's status as obiter dicta. A quoted passage of obiter dicta
may become part of the holding or ruling in a subsequent case, depending on what the latter court actually decided and how that
court treated the principle embodied in the quoted passage.
The ratio of the dissenting judge also contributes towards the obiter dicta of the case. In India, the Supreme Court gives binding force to many of its
obiter dicta.[citation needed]
Notes
- ^ Black's Law Dictionary p.
967 (5th ed. 1979).
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)