obiter dictum

(redirected from obiter dicta)
Also found in: Thesaurus, Legal.

o·bi·ter dictum

n. pl. obiter dicta (-tə) Law
See dictum.

[Latin, something said in passing : obiter, in passing + dictum, something said, from neuter past participle of dīcere, to say.]
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

obiter dictum

(ˈɒbɪtə ˈdɪktəm; ˈəʊ-)
n, pl obiter dicta (ˈdɪktə)
1. (Law) law an observation by a judge on some point of law not directly in issue in the case before him or her and thus neither requiring a decision nor serving as a precedent, but nevertheless of persuasive authority
2. any comment, remark, or observation made in passing
[Latin: something said in passing]
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014

ob•i•ter dic•tum

(ˈɒb ɪ tər ˈdɪk təm)

n., pl. obiter dic•ta (ˈdɪk tə)
1. an incidental remark or opinion.
2. a judicial opinion in a matter related but not essential to a case.
[1805–15; < Latin: (a) saying by the way]
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.

obiter dictum

A Latin phrase meaning something said in passing.
Dictionary of Unfamiliar Words by Diagram Group Copyright © 2008 by Diagram Visual Information Limited
ThesaurusAntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend:
Noun1.obiter dictum - an incidental remark
comment, remark, input - a statement that expresses a personal opinion or belief or adds information; "from time to time she contributed a personal comment on his account"
2.obiter dictum - an opinion voiced by a judge on a point of law not directly bearing on the case in question and therefore not binding
judgement, legal opinion, opinion, judgment - the legal document stating the reasons for a judicial decision; "opinions are usually written by a single judge"
law, jurisprudence - the collection of rules imposed by authority; "civilization presupposes respect for the law"; "the great problem for jurisprudence to allow freedom while enforcing order"
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.

obiter dictum

An expression of fact or opinion:
The American Heritage® Roget's Thesaurus. Copyright © 2013, 2014 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
For starters, references that a judge makes while listening to an argument are generally called obiter dicta. A judgement may also contain obiter dicta which are not binding as they are only persuasive.
In his obiter dicta, he had made this unimpeachable argument: 'They are trying to [obstruct the construction] of our dam and we cannot even ban their channels?'
Further, within that judgment, the judge (Obiter Dicta) said your resignation was unprocedural He didn't say it be undone.
Secondly, the passing observations given by the SC can in no manner be considered directions issued by, or even obiter dicta of, this court.
There is even a well-worn Latin term for it, 'obiter dicta'.
It has been said that the decision is wrong, that it was driven by political motives and that the comments about the rights of the user are obiter dicta (not a legally binding precedent) rather than the decision's ratio decidendi (the case's core legal principle).
When the Victorian essayist, literary critic, and politician Augustine Birrell [1850-- 1933] referred in his Obiter Dicta [1884] to "that great dust-heap called 'history'," he was not summoning a dustman, but perhaps he should have been.
In its obiter dicta, then Chief Justice Iftikhar Hussain, on three-member panel, remarked (November 8, 2013), `Everything is being run through nepotism and junior officers are being appointed on key posts'.
But the real victory scored by the government is that the Court has clarified what it meant with its ominous paragraph in 2014 that the good faith presumption "cannot apply to the authors, proponents and implementors of the DAP, unless there are concrete findings of good faith in their favor by the proper tribunals." The Court now says that it "did not throw[] out the presumption of bad faith" and, as the Inquirer reports, it will indeed clarify that the omens of 2014 were mere side comments ("obiter dicta") that do not form part of the binding rules laid down by the Court.
The former was ratio, and the latter obiter dicta. As stated by Vaughan CJ in 1673, "[a]n opinion given in Court, if not necessary to the judgment given of record, but that it might have been as well given if no such, or a contrary, opinion had been broach'd is no judicial opinion, nor more than a gratis dictum." (14) Only the ratio of past cases is binding on lower courts.