Court Scrutiny of Expert Evidence
Recent Decisions Highlight the Tensions
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12596143 |
|---|---|
| Authors | William E O'Brian (School of Law, University of Warwick), William E O’Brian (University of Warwick, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2003 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 172-184 |
| Publication date | 2003-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The International Journal of Evidence & Proof (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1365-7127 • E-ISSN: 1740-5572 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/136571270300700302 |
| OpenAlex | W1915832843 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
Recent decisions of the Courts of Appeal in England and Northern Ireland in Dallagher and O'Doherty highlight the risks of error which flow from the current lax standards of English law relating to the admission of expert evidence. Notwithstanding that in both decisions, the court purported to apply the same principles, an analysis of these cases indicates tensions in the law, and adds support to calls for the adoption of a stricter test for the admission of expert evidence
Appeal · English law · Northern ireland · Political science · Rules of evidence · Scrutiny · Sociology · Test (biology · Criminal Law and Evidence · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
| Citations per year | 0.05 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2004 - 2004 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |