Tri terminacijska natpisa koji dokumentiraju razgraničenje Aserije i Alverije bilježe brojne podatke o bitnim elementima procesa u kojemu je ono postignuto. Ti podaci odnose se na institute i tipične pravne izričaje poznate iz rimskoga prava koji su se uobičajeno koristili kod izvansudskog rješavanja spora. Držeći se njihove inskripcije, u ovome članku analiziraju se zabilježeni procesni instituti i pretpostavke rješavanja graničnog spora, poput suda i arbitara, načina postavljanja arbitara, stranaka u sporu, predmeta spora, odlučivanja i, napokon, donošenja pravorijeka. Na temelju postojećih epigrafskih i arheoloških analiza, razgraničenje između Aserije i Alverije sagledava se s pravnoga gledišta, analizom značenja spomenutih pravnih instituta u tome vremenu. To se čini uvažavajući specifičnost provincijske uprave u Dalmaciji i položaja provincijskoga namjesnika koji je i glede Aserije i Alverije, ali i drugih usporedivih peregrinskih zajednica, nastojao da se njihovi međusobni sporovi riješe kako ne bi predstavljali uzroke nemira, a time i zapreke za stabilnu rimsku vladavinu. Inskripcije otkrivaju da se razgraničenje provodilo arbitražno, ali u takvu procesu koji za stranke nije bio dobrovoljan. Stoga se ovdje radi o tipičnu primjeru administrativne/prisilne arbitraže kojoj su se Aserijati i Alveriti morali podvrgnuti. Three inscriptions found in Dalmatia record a boundary dispute between the tribal communities of Aseria and Alveria. These inscriptions record the relevant facts that were associated with that particular dispute and circumstances in which the dispute resolution was achieved. They refer to the legal institutes and typical legal expression that the Romans often employed in dispute resolution which was achieved outside courts and institutionalized legal proceedings. With regard to the content of the inscription, the author analyses the procedural institutes and preconditions that had to be fulfilled for the successful dispute resolution, for example, court and its constitution, selection of arbitrators, parties to the dispute, disputed subject-matter, taking the procedural actions and the decision by which the dispute was ended. On the grounds of previous epigraphic studies and archaeological contextualisation the boundary dispute between Aseria and Alveria is here appreciated from the legal point of view, with an emphasis to the identification of exact meaning of the legal terms that were employed and with reference to the relevant institutes of Roman law at the time being (early classical Roman law). The analysis is provided with regard to the peculiarity of the provincial administration in Dalmatia, especially to the position and imperium of the provincial governor at that time, as well as with reference to the boundary disputes that the other Dalmatian tribal communities had among themselves. The intention of the Romans becomes apparent to resolve such disputes and thereby to eliminate all the potential dangers and obstacles for the stabile provincial governance. The inscriptions reveal that the boundary dispute was decided in arbitration, though, not in a regular one, but rather in a proceeding which was not voluntary for the parties, because it was unilaterally imposed by the provincial governor himself. For this reason, that particular dispute resolution should be qualified as an administrative arbitration with evident mandatory characteristics.