What is the point of an expert?

In litigation, an expert is often called in. By the way, what is the point of an expert?

In a dispute, before an arbitrator for a case involving the Residential Construction Guarantee or even before a judge for a case before the civil courts, each party will present evidence in the hope of convincing the decision-maker to decide in their favor. This evidence is administered in particular by testimony. However, do not testify who wants to on every subject: scientific or technical questions are subject to expertise and are reserved for expert witnesses. By the way, what is the point of an expert?

As indicated by the Court of Appeal¹ with reference to the doctrine² on this issue, an expert witness is one who has specialized expertise in a given sector of activity. It is the court that will grant expert status to an individual based on their qualifications and skills. Although in many cases the competence of an expert is established by showing that he has degrees in a specific field or that he is a member of a particular professional order, these are not necessarily requirements to be recognized as an expert in a field by a court since this title can be recognized to an individual who has “particular experimental knowledge”.

The qualification of an individual as an expert is of great importance for the scope of that individual's testimony. Unlike the “ordinary” witness, who establishes the factual framework by testifying strictly on facts, the role of the expert is to enlighten the court on certain scientific or technical questions of a certain complexity, and not on simple subjects. For this purpose, he will be allowed to give his opinion, which an ordinary witness cannot do. Given this particular role, the expert must be impartial, otherwise the probative value of his testimony will be affected or it will simply be rejected.

Also, considering the distinct role of the expert arising from his particular knowledge in a given field and the impartiality of the latter, it is useful to retain the services of an expert in order to demonstrate in court certain complex elements in cases where different opinions are expressed in relation to a situation, as is often the case with a problem affecting a building.

Is it really a problem? What are the rules of the art? What correction methods are possible? On these questions, only an expert will be able to enlighten the court.

In order to reduce the time and costs associated with litigation, the parties should give priority to, or at least consider, the possibility of using a common expert. If necessary, the joint expert will be able to quickly obtain the correct information on a given situation. Once expert issues have been resolved, the parties can quickly focus discussions on other elements of the case and possibly reach a settlement. It's a good thought.

DID YOU KNOW THAT?
In some cases where the court decides in favor of a party, the court may order that the costs incurred by a party in conducting an expert opinion, preparing and testifying at a hearing may be borne by the opposing party.

1 Landry v. Ste-Foy (City of) (Quebec) (Quebec), 2010 QCCA 2351 (CanLII).
2 Jean-Claude Royer, The Civil Evidence, 4th ed., 4th ed., Cowansville, Éditions Yvon Blais, 2008, p. 325 to 330.

Consult the source publication