Open AccessProcedural position of the expert and specialist as participants in civil proceedings
Author(s) -
Віктор Вікторович Заборовський,
Юрій Михайлович Бисага
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
analìtično-porìvnâlʹne pravoznavstvo
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2788-6018
DOI - 10.24144/2788-6018.2021.01.6
Subject(s) - position (finance) , expert opinion , process (computing) , dialectic , order (exchange) , psychology , work (physics) , engineering ethics , computer science , engineering , medicine , epistemology , business , mechanical engineering , philosophy , finance , intensive care medicine , operating system
This research reveals problematic issues related to the determination of the procedural position of the expert and specialist as other participants in the trial, whose activities are an important source of specialized knowledge in terms of consideration and resolution of civil cases.
A theoretical and applied study was conducted both to determine the features of the procedural status of an expert and a specialist in civil proceedings, and in terms of disclosing the differences between these participants in the trial. The position is argued, according to which the expert and the specialist have no legal interest in the results of the case, and their participation in the process is conditioned by the provision of a reasoned and objective written opinion on the issues, or – the need for advice and technical assistance during the proceedings. actions related to the use of technical means.
In order to achieve this goal, the author used methods typical of legal science. The study was conducted using a dialectical method of cognition of legal reality, which provided an opportunity to analyze the essence of the procedural status of the expert and specialist. The use of the system-structural method made it possible to determine the general structure of the work, which contributed to the proper disclosure of the objectives of the study.
Based on the study, the author concludes that the main distinguishing features between the status of expert and specialist in civil proceedings, and the results of their activities are: conclusions and expert advice, in contrast to the expert's opinion, do not belong to the means of proof in civil proceedings; the expert's opinion is the result of a special study, in contrast to the expert's opinion; the legislation sets clear requirements both for the person who may be a forensic expert and the form and content of the expert's opinion as a means of proof; there is a significant difference in the civil procedural status of such participants in the trial, as well as in the process of their involvement in the case.