Legal Definitions - aliud examen

Aliud examen is a Latin legal term that translates to "another investigation" or "another trial." It refers to a situation where a legal dispute or a question of fact is determined or resolved using a method of judgment that is different from, or foreign to, the standard or expected legal process for that particular context or jurisdiction.

Essentially, it describes the application of an alternative, often unusual or inappropriate, mode of inquiry or resolution instead of the established legal procedures.

• Example 1: Historical Trial by Ordeal

  In medieval Europe, before the widespread adoption of jury trials, some legal disputes or accusations of guilt were resolved through "trial by ordeal." For instance, an accused person might be required to hold a hot iron or be submerged in water. If they emerged unharmed or floated, they were deemed innocent by divine intervention. This practice would be considered an aliud examen because it was a method of determining guilt or innocence that relied on supernatural signs rather than the examination of evidence and testimony by a judge or jury, which became the standard legal process later on.

• Example 2: International Commercial Arbitration

  Imagine two multinational corporations, one based in Germany and the other in Japan, enter into a complex manufacturing agreement. To avoid potential conflicts arising from differing national laws and court systems, their contract includes a clause stating that any disputes will be resolved through binding arbitration conducted by a neutral panel in Singapore, following specific international arbitration rules. This arbitration process, rather than litigation in a German or Japanese national court, constitutes an aliud examen. It is a different, pre-agreed mode of trial or dispute resolution chosen by the parties, distinct from the standard judicial proceedings available in their respective home countries.

• Example 3: Inappropriate Judicial Fact-Finding

  Consider a hypothetical scenario where a judge in a modern civil court case, faced with conflicting expert testimonies regarding a technical scientific point, decides to resolve the factual dispute by consulting a psychic or by flipping a coin, rather than by carefully weighing the presented evidence, questioning the experts, or seeking an independent scientific review. This action would be an extreme example of an aliud examen. The judge would be employing a method of fact-finding that is entirely foreign and inappropriate to the established legal procedures for determining truth in a court of law, which demand rational assessment of evidence.