This issue contains one article. Christopher Bruce investigates the principles that the courts have developed to determine whether experts and their evidence should be admitted into court.
- Dr. Bruce argues that these principles can usefully be divided into four categories: the requirement that expert testimony be useful; the identification of whether the expert is qualified; the determination of whether the expert’s testimony is reliable; and the evaluation of the weight that is to be attached to the expert’s opinion.
- In his article, Dr. Bruce reviews these principles and summarises a number of recent rulings in Canada and the United States with respect to each of them. He finds that the courts are less likely to disqualify witnesses than they are to accept a witness’ qualifications subject to the understanding that opposing counsel will exercise its right to subject the witness to vigorous cross-examination, or to caution that the expert’s testimony will be given reduced weight.