Deirdre Dwyer examines how a court can decide when to accept an expert's opinion, focusing on English civil justice.

The book is a comprehensive narration of the use of expertise in international criminal trials offering reflection on standards concerning the quality and presentation of expert evidence. It analyzes and critiques the rules governing expert evidence in international criminal trials and the strategies employed by counsel and courts relying upon expert evidence and challenges that courts face determining its reliability. In particular, the author considers how the procedural and evidentiary architecture of international criminal courts and tribunals influences the courts’ ability to meaningfully incorporate expert evidence into the rational fact-finding process. The book provides analysis of the unique properties of expert evidence as compared with other forms of evidence and the challenges that these properties present for fact-finding in international criminal trials. It draws conclusions about the extent to which particularized evidentiary rules for expert evidence in international criminal trials is wanting. Based on comparative analyses of relevant national practices, the book proposes procedural improvements to address some of the challenges associated with the use of expertise in international criminal trials.

This pioneering study on environmental case-law examines how courts engage with science and reviews legitimate styles of judicial reasoning.

This book focuses on the legal and procedural problems caused by China’s default in the South China Sea Arbitration. Many of these problems arose because in several respects, China departed from the conduct of other defaulting States in cases before the International Court of Justice. The book argues that the Tribunal, confronted with the difficulties of maintaining the balance between two parties in a situation of default, drew on the full range of its powers to ensure that neither China nor the Philippines would suffer from China’s default. Further, the book describes the shortcomings of the submissions of putative amicus curiae. It refutes China’s questioning of the independence and impartiality of the experts and of the judges. In so doing, it explains the expert opinions and the Tribunal ’s assessments of the latter in the areas of satellite imagery, coral reef ecology, and navigational safety, while rebutting the half- truths and counter-truths disseminated by Chinese scholars about the proceedings. The book compares China’s threats to the independence of the Tribunal to its behavior towards Chinese judges. It places China’s accusations of bias against the Tribunal in the context of China’s domestic situation, and concludes that the Tribunal, acting independently and impartially, was able to perform the judicial function, despite China’s default.

Inter- and supranational courts derive their legitimacy partly from an institutional comparison: judges' legal expertise and the quality of judicial procedures justify a court's claim to authority towards other branches of government and other courts with overlapping jurisdiction. To provide a benchmark for assessing judicial outcomes that is compatible with democratic commitments, Johann Laux suggests a new normative category, Public Epistemic Authority (PEA). It builds on the mechanisms behind theories of collective intelligence and empirical research on judicial decision-making. PEA tracks judges' collective ability to reliably identify breaches of law. It focuses on cognitive tasks in adjudication. The author applies PEA to the Court of Justice of the European Union and offers suggestions for improving its institutional design.

This book represents a fresh approach to EC competition law - one that is of singular value in grappling with the huge economic challenges we face today. As a critical analysis of the law and options available to European competition authorities and legal practitioners in the field, it stands without peer. It will be greatly welcomed by lawyers, policymakers and other interested professionals in Europe and throughout the world.

The Global Practice of Forensic Science presents histories,issues, patterns, and diversity in the applications ofinternational forensic science. Written by 64 experienced andinternationally recognized forensic scientists, the volumedocuments the practice of forensic science in 28 countries fromAfrica, the Americas, Asia, Australia and Europe. Eachcountry’s chapter explores factors of political history,academic linkages, the influence of individual cases, facilitydevelopment, types of cases examined, integration within forensicscience, recruitment, training, funding, certification,accreditation, quality control, technology, disaster preparedness,legal issues, research and future directions. Aimed at allscholars interested in international forensic science, the volumeprovides detail on the diverse fields within forensic science andtheir applications around the world.

This book presents a concise account of the English system of civil litigation, covering court proceedings in England and Wales. It is an original and important study of a system which is the historical root of the US litigation system. The volume offers a comprehensive and properly balanced account of the entire range of dispute resolution techniques. As the first book on this subject to be published in the USA, it enables American lawyers to gain an overview of the main institutions of English Civil Procedure, including mediation and arbitration. It will render the English system of civil justice accessible to law students in the US, practitioners of law, professors, judges, and policy-makers.

What rules or principles govern the assessment of evidence in EU competition enforcement? This book offers, for the first time, a comprehensive academic study on the topic. Its aim is twofold. Firstly, it produces a typology of evidence standards in competition proceedings at the EU level, thereby systemising the guidance that is currently dispersed in the case-law of the EU Courts. Secondly, it examines the applicable evidence rules and principles with a view to better understanding their role in EU competition enforcement. In so doing, the book illustrates that evidence standards are not mere technicalities and their significance should not be underestimated. Rigorous and engaging, this work provides a much-needed analysis of a key question of EU competition enforcement.

Essay from the year 2015 in the subject Law - Penology, grade: 81, University of the West of England, Bristol, course: Forensic Computing and Security, language: English, abstract: This essay examines the role of expert evidence in court decisions and subsequent miscarriage of justice. To this end, it takes a look at the case of Sally Clark, who was initially convicted for murdering her two infant children and later cleared of the charges. A miscarriage of justice is an ambiguous phase that is capable of instigating many distinctive meanings, interpreted and influenced by life experiences. The widely considered definition is a failure to attain justice. However this undermines The Criminal Justice System who robustly endeavours to convey justice for all, by convicting the guilty and protecting the innocent. Unfortunately this ambition is belittled by the never-ending statistic that defendants are still being wrongfully imprisoned this is because some experts are culprits of fabricating and concealing evidence. Sally Clark’s trial replicates similar characteristics.