Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T14:06:11.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - From Institutional to Epistemic Authority: Rethinking Court-Appointed Experts

from Part IV - Expert Evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2022

By
Carmen Vázquez
Edited by
Jordi Ferrer Beltrán  and
Carmen Vázquez
Jordi Ferrer Beltrán
Affiliation:
Universitat de Girona
Carmen Vázquez
Affiliation:
Universitat de Girona
Get access

Summary

Beyond any theoretical suppositions or assumptions regarding the greater reliability of court-appointed experts as opposed to expert witnesses, very few analyses have been conducted to test the hypothesis in current legal systems. And this is precisely the objective of this work: taking the current Spanish procedural system as my example, I will set out to question not only the necessary epistemic superiority of court-appointed expert opinions, but also the fact that the mere origin of the expert opinion is a relevant factor that should be considered. As we shall see, the selection, prepping and remuneration of the expert could be regulated in such a way that they do not even guarantee the impartiality of the court-appointed expert; however, in order to assess the reliability of an expert opinion we would have to evaluate what the expert did and asserted in the specific case, and this is independent of their origin.

Keywords

Court-appointed expertexpert witnessesexpert opinionimpartiality
Type
Chapter
Information
Evidential Legal Reasoning
Crossing Civil Law and Common Law Traditions
 , pp. 217 - 247
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abel Lluch, X. (2009). La prueba pericial. In Lluch, Abel and Picó i Junoy, eds., La prueba pericial, Barcelona: J. M. Bosch, pp. 15–248.Google Scholar
Allen, R. (2015). A Proposed Evidence Law. Boston University International Law Journal, vol. 33(2), 359–94.Google Scholar
Allen, R. and Miller, J. S. (1993). The Common Law Theory of Experts. Deference or education?. Northwestern University Law Review, 87(4), 1131–47.Google Scholar
Appazov, A. (2016). Expert Evidence and International Criminal Justice, Copenhagen: Springer.Google Scholar
Bachmaier, L. (2009). Dos modelos de prueba pericial penal en el derecho comparado: Estados Unidos de Norteamérica y Alemania. Jueces para la democracia, 66, 118–37.Google Scholar
Dror, I. E. (2018). Biases in forensic experts. Science, 2360(6386), 243 ff.Google Scholar
EGLE- European Guide for Legal Expertise. (2015). Guía de buenas prácticas de la pericia judicial civil en la Unión Europea. https://experts-institute.eu/en/projects/the-guide-to-good-practices-in-civil-judicial-expertise-in-the-european-union/Google Scholar
Gross, S. R. (1991). Expert Evidence. Wisconsin Law Review, 1991, 1113–232.Google Scholar
Hooper, L., Cecil, J. and Willging, T. (2001). Neutral Science Panels: Two Examples of Panels of Court-Appointed Experts in the Breast Implants Product Liability Litigation, Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center.Google Scholar
Kukucka, J., Kassin, S. M., Zapf, P. and Dror, I. E. (2017). Cognitive Bias and Blindness: A Global Survey of Forensic Science Examiners. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6, 452–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laguna, M. del P. and Palomo, J. (2008). La prueba pericial económica en el ámbito procesal español, Madrid: Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.Google Scholar
Muñoz Sabaté, L. (2001) Fundamentos de prueba judicial civil, L.E.C 1/2000, Barcelona: J. Ma. Bosch.Google Scholar
Nieva Fenoll, J. (2017). Repensando Daubert: Elementos de convicción que debe tener un buen dictamen pericial. In Picó, J. i Junoy, , ed., Peritaje y prueba pericial, Barcelona: J. M. Bosch.Google Scholar
Orellana, de Castro, R. (2017). Un estudio crítico sobre los diferentes sistemas de designación de peritos y sobre las listas de peritos en la LEC. In Pico, J. i Junoy, ed., Peritaje y prueba pericial, Barcelona: J. M. Bosch.Google Scholar
Pardo, M. S. (2010). Evidence Theory and the NAS Report on Forensic Science. Utah Law Review, 2, 367–83.Google Scholar
Picó i Junoy, J. (2001). La prueba pericial en el proceso civil español, Ley 1/2000 de Enjuiciamiento Civil, Barcelona: Bosch Editor.Google Scholar
Saltzburg, S. A., Martin, M. M. and Capra, D. (2006). Federal Rules of Evidence Manual, 9th ed., vol. 3, San Francisco: Lexis Nexis.Google Scholar
Serra Domínguez, M. (2000). La prueba pericial. In Alonso-Cuevillas, J., ed., Instituciones del nuevo proceso civil. Comentarios sistemáticos a la Ley 1/2000 sobre Enjuiciamiento Civil, Barcelona: Difusión Jurídica.Google Scholar
Taruffo, M. (1996). La prova scientifiche nella recente esperienza statunitense. Rivista Trimestrale Di Diritto e Procedura Civile, 50(1), 219–49.Google Scholar
Vázquez, C. (2015). De la prueba científica a la prueba pericial, Barcelona-Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
Vázquez, C. (2016). La prueba pericial en la experiencia estadounidense. Jueces para la democracia, 86, 92–112.Google Scholar
Vázquez, C. (2018). La im/parcialidad pericial y otros conceptos afines. Confiabilidad, desacuerdos y sesgos de los expertos. Isonomía, 48, 69–107.Google Scholar
Wigmore, J. H. (1904). A Treatise on the System of Evidence in Trials at Common Law, 2nd ed. (1923), Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×