"An expert was only qualified to give evidence that was relevant if his knowledge and expertise was beyond that of the layman and such evidence had to relate to a factual issue in the case". In the civil courts, the admissibility of expert evidence is governed by section 3 of the Civil Evidence Act 1972 and rules of the court. Middleton 2 QB 766 would seem to agree that the expert need only have exper-tise beyond that of a layman, not that the expert be qualified beyond that of a layman. Silverlock 2 QB 766, an amateur graphologist was allowed to act as an expert on handwriting and a number of cases since have maintained the position that expert status can be obtained by personal expe-rience as well as by formal training. It is the court that decides the validity of the expert witness and it is not necessary, in most cases, that the person called is formally qualified. This duty overrides any contractual obligation that may have been formed between the expert and the party instructing and paying them. There is no such thing as a claimant's or a defendant's expert and, by Rule 35.3 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, it is the duty of the expert to assist the court on matters within their expertise. The role of the expert in UK courts is to assist the court itself in deciding the reliability of evidence.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |