European University Institute Library

Expert evidence deficiencies in the judgments of the courts of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights, George Cumming, of the Inner Temple, barrister

eng

Includes bibliographical references (pages 245-248) and index

index present

non fiction

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

bibliography

871243597

George Cumming, of the Inner Temple, barrister

European monographs, 89

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 --, Provided by Publisher

Introduction. CHAPTER 1 Brief Overview of Statutory Interpretation. CHAPTER 2 Scope of Expert Evidence as Regards the Court of Justice of the European Union, the General Court and the European Court of Human Rights. CHAPTER 3 Use of Expert Evidence in Selected Judgments of the United States' Supreme Court (USSC), the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) and the Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) (BCSC). CHAPTER 4 The CJ and GC Involving Primarily Pursuant to Article 267 TFEU References Citizenship and Competition Law and One Direct Action for Non-contractual Liability against the Commission. CHAPTER 5 European Court of Human Rights Judgments Hirst (2) and Scoppola. Conclusion. Bibliography. Index