Sentences with phrase «admissibility of expert evidence»

The four part - test for admissibility of expert evidence set forth in R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 9 (S.C.C.) remains germane:

[12] Mohan sets out the current approach to the admissibility of expert evidence.

They set out guidance regarding the admissibility of expert evidence, the responsibilities of the legal teams and the court in relation to such evidence, and othe importance of economy in litigation.

Judge Weisberg then certified the following question of law to the Circuit Court: «whether the District of Columbia should adopt Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (or a revised Frye standard) for the admissibility of expert evidence.»

If you want to challenge the admissibility of expert evidence, it is best to do so in a voire dire so the trial judge can get a flavour of the expert's testimony and be able to make a more informed decision on whether the evidence should be excluded.

The first component requires the court to consider the four traditional «threshold requirements» for the admissibility of expert evidence established in R. v. Mohan [1994] 2 SCR 9: (i) relevance; (ii) necessity in assisting the trier of fact; (iii) absence of an exclusionary rule; and (iv) the need for the expert to be properly qualified.

He comments on the admissibility of expert evidence, on the reliance on experts to assess damages and a surrebuttal expert in relation to the issue of damages.

published consultation papers on administrative redress, consumer remedies for faulty goods, and the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings