Expert evidence deficiencies in the judgments of the courts of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights

Description:

Questions of admissibility surrounding expert evidence have always bedevilled the judiciary. However, statutory language and rules of procedure, conscientiously interpreted and applied to the use of expert evidence, can go a long way towards achieving rectitude of decision where judgement requires knowledge not necessarily possessed by the jurists responsible for trying the case. In this remarkable work of analysis and commentary, George Cumming takes the position that the prominent international courts of Europe fail to follow their own rules of procedure in the use of expert opinion, thus potentially breaching the express right to a fair trial embodied within Article 6 (1) ECHR.

subjects: Expert Evidence,  Admissible evidence,  Judgments,  Fair trial,  Law,  Interpretation and construction,  UE/CE Droit,  UE/CE Cour de justice,  Cour européenne des droits de l'homme,  Cours suprêmes,  Jugements,  Témoignages,  Expertises judiciaires,  UE/CE Traités,  Convention européenne des droits de l'homme,  Rechtspleging,  Hof van Justitie van de Europese Gemeenschappen,  Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens,  Bewijsrecht

Places: Europe,  North America,  Etats-Unis d'Amérique,  Canada