Legal Definitions - ex hypothesi

Ex hypothesi is a Latin term meaning "hypothetically" or "by hypothesis." It describes something that is true or follows logically as a direct consequence of a particular assumption or premise that has been made.

Ex hypothesi is a Latin phrase that translates to "by hypothesis" or "on the assumption." It is used to describe something that is considered true or logically follows *if* a particular premise, condition, or set of facts is accepted as true, even if that premise is not yet proven or is purely theoretical. Essentially, it means "assuming X is true, then Y logically follows."

• Example 1: Business Planning

  A startup company presents its financial projections to potential investors. The CEO states, "Our projected profitability for the next fiscal year, ex hypothesi, relies entirely on securing a 20% increase in our subscriber base. If we fail to achieve that growth, our revenue targets would not be met."

  Explanation: Here, the company's profitability is presented as a hypothetical outcome that is true *only if* the specific condition of a 20% subscriber increase is met. Without that assumption, the profitability figures are not valid.

• Example 2: Policy Analysis

  During a city council meeting, a new urban development plan is being discussed. A council member argues, "The proposed pedestrian zone, ex hypothesi, will reduce traffic accidents in the downtown area by 30% if all delivery vehicles are restricted to nighttime hours. This restriction is a critical assumption for the safety benefits."

  Explanation: The reduction in traffic accidents is a hypothetical benefit that is true *on the assumption* that delivery vehicles are restricted to specific hours. If that restriction is not implemented, the projected safety improvement may not materialize.

• Example 3: Legal Argumentation

  In a criminal trial, the defense attorney argues, "If the DNA evidence presented by the prosecution is proven to belong to a different individual, then my client's involvement in the crime is, ex hypothesi, impossible. The entire case against them would collapse under that premise."

  Explanation: The client's innocence is presented as a logical conclusion that would be true *if* the specific hypothesis about the DNA evidence belonging to someone else is accepted as fact. The argument's validity rests entirely on that foundational assumption.