Witness competence meaning

Checklist This Checklist outlines the core components that expert witnesses should include within their reports so they comply with CPR PD 35, para 3.2 and the Civil Justice Council’s Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims 2014 (the Guidance). For more information on the content of an expert’s report, see Practice Note: Expert reports. Details of the expert's qualifications The qualifications must be relevant to the matters in the claim on which the expert has been asked to provide their opinion. The principal information required is the expert’s academic and professional credentials. Where highly specialised knowledge is necessary, include particulars of specific training, investigatory work and any other pertinent experience which, in their view, equips them to give such evidence. Details of any literature or other material relied on in making the report Where opinions are cited without verification, the full particulars of those opinions must be set out. If feasible, also identify the qualifications of the person who gave the opinion, as...

This Practice Note outlines hearsay evidence—its meaning, use, and the rules for particular types of documents, including those exempt from the hearsay rule. It sets out the notice procedure where a party intends to rely on hearsay, and the steps to take if served with a hearsay notice under Rule 33.2 of the CPR. It also considers the court’s approach to hearsay, the weight it may carry, and the extent to which cross-examination is permitted under Rule 33.4. The question of admitting similar fact evidence at trial is also addressed What is hearsay evidence? A hearsay statement is ‘a statement made otherwise than by a person while giving oral evidence in proceedings which is tendered as evidence of the matters stated’, as defined in CEA 1995, s 1(2) and CPR 33.1. A gives evidence by witness statement instead of attending trial to speak to it orally, thereby depriving the other parties of the opportunity to cross-examine. A gives evidence of what B told A...

Class actions—Belgium—Q&A guide This Practice Note presents a Belgium-focused Q&A on class actions, issued within the Lexology Getting the Deal Through series by Law Business Research (law stated as at 6 October 2022). Authors: White & Case—Olivier Vanhulst; Nicolas Vande Velde; Julien Hislaire. Describe how the court system is arranged in relation to collective or representative proceedings (class actions). In which courts can such actions be filed? Relying on article XVII.35 of the Belgian Code of Economic Law (BCEL) and article 633-ter of the Belgian Judicial Code, the Enterprise Court of Brussels and, on appeal, the Court of Appeal of Brussels, possess exclusive competence to hear class actions. A ruling of the Court of Appeal of Brussels may ultimately be brought before the Court of Cassation, though this remedy is confined to examining errors of law or procedure. How frequent are class actions in your jurisdiction? What has been the recent stance of legislators and the judiciary towards class...

This how-to guide explores how to source an expert witness capable of underpinning the case your client seeks to advance or resist. It also addresses how to gauge, in advance, the likely calibre of that expert in producing a persuasive report and performing under cross-examination about it. Identifying the need for an expert witness In some disputes it will be apparent from the beginning that independent opinion evidence from a specialist with no involvement in the underlying facts is required to establish a claimant’s affirmative case. This is typical where it is alleged the defendant fell short of the expected standard of competence in a defined discipline—construction and medical practice are obvious illustrations. Often an expert will already be retained to help the claimant frame and plead the allegations. In other matters, the necessity for the claimant to instruct an expert may only crystallise once the defence has been served, or even after factual witness statements have been exchanged. Late recognition of the requirement for expert opinion...