Legal Definitions - ut prosint ad veritatem indagandam

The Latin phrase ut prosint ad veritatem indagandam translates to "that they may be of service for investigating the truth."

This principle is fundamental in legal systems, particularly concerning the discovery of evidence and information. It signifies that any document, testimony, or piece of evidence that could potentially help uncover the facts and establish the truth in a legal proceeding should be made available or considered. It emphasizes the importance of a thorough and complete investigation to ensure a just outcome.

Here are some examples illustrating this concept:

• Civil Litigation - Document Discovery: In a lawsuit where a small business is suing a larger corporation for breach of contract, the small business's legal team requests access to all internal communications, financial records, and project timelines related to the disputed contract from the corporation. The court may compel the corporation to provide these extensive documents because they are considered ut prosint ad veritatem indagandam. These records could reveal the corporation's true intentions, its understanding of the contract terms, or any actions it took that led to the alleged breach, thereby helping the court determine the actual facts of the case.

• Criminal Investigation - Forensic Evidence: Following a suspected arson incident, investigators meticulously collect samples of debris, accelerant residues, and security footage from the scene. They also interview witnesses and gather phone records of potential suspects. All these pieces of evidence—the physical samples, the video, the witness statements, and the phone data—are gathered and analyzed with the understanding that they are ut prosint ad veritatem indagandam. Each item serves as a potential clue that could help reconstruct the events, identify the perpetrator, and establish the truth about how the fire started and who was responsible.

• Regulatory Inquiry - Expert Testimony: A government regulatory body is investigating a pharmaceutical company for allegedly misleading claims about a new drug's efficacy. During the inquiry, the regulators call upon independent medical experts and statisticians to review the company's clinical trial data and methodology. The testimony and analysis provided by these experts are sought ut prosint ad veritatem indagandam. Their objective insights are crucial for the regulators to understand the complex scientific information, evaluate the validity of the company's claims, and ultimately determine if any deceptive practices occurred.