Expert Or Specialist? Is There A Difference ?

There is absolutely identical to each other civil cases. Every civil case to some extent, special, although it may have a similar legal situation. But, nevertheless, for certain types of civil cases should be submission of this form of evidence as an expert examination (examination). Expertise – this is a reasonable conclusion drawn in the manner prescribed by law individuals with special knowledge in one or various fields of science, technology, arts and crafts. Examination may be conducted in a civil case only court-appointed in the manner prescribed by Article 79, 80 cpc rf in this case it is called a forensic examination. In the case where there is a need to ascertain the validity of the proof to sue in court expert study conducted at the initiative of an interested person in the institution, the entitled to conduct such research, in common parlance, this conclusion is called “independent examination”. Subsequently, this study can be used in court as written evidence validity of the claim – the conclusion of the expert, with subsequent involvement of specialists, who gave this opinion, as a specialist.

Unlike these proofs from each other – forensic and expert research (Conclusions of the expert) is first, in order of their conduct. So, forensics performed on the basis of a judicial determination of the purpose of examination, which identifies the issues raised in the resolution expert. Expert research specialist conducted under contract to conduct an expert study to a particular specialist or to a particular competence center (variants of names may be different). Questions that are designed to allow the study in this case, put in a request or an attorney, or a statement of the person concerned. A second difference is that the examiner judicial examination, warned about professional responsibility for knowingly giving false conclusion on Article 307 of the Professional Code, whereas the specialist, conducting expert studies, such subscription does not. However, afterwards, if This person will be questioned in court, it will also be warned about professional responsibility, but for perjury as a witness.

Does Forensics for the court any more substantial value? By virtue of Part 2 of Art. 1967 hpa RF: “No evidence has for the court a pre-determined force.” However, experience shows that courts use provided by the expert studies conducted on the initiative hand, only as a basis for appointment to judicial examination. Would like to draw attention to the fact that sometimes the expert study carried out by experts of the highest category with the experience of 40 years, whereas Trial expertise in the same case holds a specialist with 5 years experience. But practice is practice. So whether to recommend that his client sometimes quite costly procedure expert studies (Peer review)? I can assert that expert studies and never harm anyone not brought, and sometimes helped to refrain from unnecessary action to appeal court decisions.