Abstract
Expert evidence has an indisputable role in all types of legal proceedings. Its regulation in the field of civil law is governed by some common parameters. However, there are also important differences that make it difficult to articulate a common European framework that allows the integration of the different legal experiences and overcomes the difficulties that block the European mobility of experts and recognise expert opinions with origin in other countries. This chapter aims to show the common elements that characterise expert evidence in civil law and, at the same time, to highlight the regulatory differences that need to be overcome in order to achieve a true harmonisation that will contribute to European procedural unification, especially concerning who has the initiative to propose taking expert evidence, how experts are selected, how evidence is submitted and, finally, the probative value of expert opinions and their influence on judicial decisions.
This piece of research shows part of the results of the research project DER2017-87516-P (funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Original version: ‘Cuando el testigo posea conocimientos científicos, técnicos, artísticos o prácticos sobre la materia a que se refieran los hechos del interrogatorio, el tribunal admitirá las manifestaciones que en virtud de dichos conocimientos agregue el testigo a sus respuestas sobre los hechos.ʼ
- 2.
The Spanish system of technical assistance is somewhat peculiar concerning that in other European countries that are analysed here since defence and procedural representation are split up and attributed to different subjects: the lawyer (defence) and the court attorney (representation).
- 3.
The guidelines are available at: http://enfsi.eu/documents/forensic-guidelines/.
- 4.
Original version: ‘(…) la educación resulta necesaria. Sin ella existirá siempre el riesgo de aceptar como conocimiento sólido lo que en rigor tiene escaso fundamento, o de terminar haciéndoles decir a los datos arrojados por las pruebas lo que no dicen ni pueden decir, con lo que la justicia de la decisión puede quedar comprometida. Sin educación la base cognoscitiva de la decisión judicial se debilita y el riesgo de error se hace más fuerte.ʼ
References
Ansanelli, V. (2019). L’utilizzazione della prova scientifica nel proceso civile. Cenni di Diritto comparato. Rivista di Diritto Procesuale, 4–5.
Bujosa Vadell, L. (2017). La prueba pericial en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. In J. Picó i Junoy (Ed.), Peritaje y prueba pericial. Bosch Editor.
Champod, C., & Vuille, J. (2011). Scientific evidence in Europe—Admissibility, evaluation and equality of arms. International Commentary on Evidence, 9(1), 1–68.
Cortés Domínguez, V., & Moreno Catena, V. (2017). Derecho procesal civil. Parte general. Tiran lo Blanch.
Gascón Abellán, M. (2016). Conocimientos expertos y deferencia del juez (apuntes para la superación de un problema). Doxa. Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho, 39.
Gascón Inchausti, F. (2017). ¿Hacia una armonización de la prueba pericial en Europa? In J. Picó i Junoy (Ed.), Peritaje y prueba pericial. Bosch Editor.
Lösing, N. (2020). La prueba pericial en el proceso civil alemán. In J. Picó i Junoy (Ed.), La prueba pericial a examen. Propuestas de lege ferenda. Bosch Editor.
Murray, P. L., & Stürner, R. (2004). German civil justice. Carolina Academic Press.
Peiteado Mariscal, P. (2017). Obtención de prueba pericial en la Unión Europea. In J. Picó i Junoy (Ed.), Peritaje y prueba pericial. Bosch Editor.
Popa, G., & Necula, I. (2013). Study on expert status in the European judicial system, AGORA. International Journal of Juridical Sciences, 3, 161–168.
Solaro, C., & Jean, J. P. (1987). El proceso penal en Francia. Jueces para la Democracia, 2.
Taruffo, M. (2008). La prueba. Marcial Pons.
Timmerbeil, S. (2003). The role of expert witnesses in German and U.S. civil litigation. Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law, 9(1), 163–187.
Vázquez Rojas, C. (2014). La Prueba pericial. Entre la deferencia y la educación. Girona: Universitat de Girona.
Yein Ng, G. (2014). Study on the role of experts in judicial systems of the Council of Europe Member States. CEPEJ-GT-QUAL(2014)2Rev, Strasbourg, September 1. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/534f89eee4b0aedbe40ae270/t/558a6d15e4b0dfba0a2afcc8/1435135253774/3rev_2014_CEPEJ-GT-QUAL_RoleExperts_en.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fernández-López, M. (2022). Expert Evidence in Civil Law Systems. In: Guillén-Nieto, V., Stein, D. (eds) Language as Evidence. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84330-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84330-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-84329-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-84330-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)