expert evidence One Paper Buildigs专家证据一纸建筑.docVIP

EXPERT EVIDENCE: PROCEDURE AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES In conjunction with Claire Matthews’ article on how to achieve the best from an expert witness, the ambit of this document is to set out the ‘nuts and bolts’ of the procedure to be adopted and the main principles to be considered. The case law in this area is extensive and this guide aims only to clarify the essential aspects. For a more detailed analysis on how specific situations have been deal with by the Courts, please refer to chapter 10-61 in Archbold 2011. Experts’ written reports The primary provision permitting the admissibility of expert evidence in the form of a written report, is section 30 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. In determining admissibility, the Court must have regard to (i) the contents of the report, (ii) the reasons why the author of the report will not give oral evidence of its contents, (iii) any risk, in particular to whether it is likely to be possible to controvert the contents, that its admission or exclusion will result in unfairness to the accused and (iv) to any other relevant circumstances. An expert’s report which is admissible is then deemed to be evidence of any fact or opinion stated within it. The Rules The rules pertaining to the admissibility of expert evidence are contained in part 33 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2010, which came into force on the 5th April 2010. The rules are easily viewable online by clicking on the following link: .uk/criminal/procrules_fin/docs/crim-pr-2010-part33.pdf Expert’s duty to the Court Rule 33.2 sets out the expert’s duty to the Court, whose overriding objective is to give objective, unbiased opinions based within his or her expertise. The duty to the Court overrides any duty to the party instructing the expert. The expert is required to notify all parties, and the Court, if their opinion has changed from that contained within the report. Content of Expert’s report Rule 33.3 comprises the elements which must feature in every expert