 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
20.2
The court's present powers to control expert evidence
Expert evidence is treated differently from purely factual evidence. With the abolition
in 1999 of hearsay as a general ground of inadmissibility in civil cases,
the main
basis upon which factual evidence is presently excluded as inadmissible, is lack of
relevance. The Working Party has recommended
against the court taking up powers
to exclude relevant and admissible factual evidence and has instead proposed that the
court should adopt a more stringent approach to relevance, viewed as a matter of
degree, and to limit its control of prolix evidence to the setting of time-limits for
witnesses and limiting the number of witnesses one may call on a particular issue.
Expert evidence has always been, and still is, subject to much greater control by the
court. This is reflected in section 58(1) of the Evidence Ordinance, which states :-
"Subject to any rules, where a person is called as a witness in any civil proceedings, his
opinion on any relevant matter on which he is qualified to give expert evidence shall be
admissible in evidence."
Notes
|
 |
|