| Autor: |
Richardson, Arthur, Pham, Helen, Hollands, Michael |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of Law & Medicine; 2023, Vol. 30 Issue 2, p472-487, 16p |
| Abstrakt: |
The tension that exists between the medical and legal professions regarding expert evidence is longstanding. In this article, we will examine some of the issues regarding expert evidence particularly as it relates to matters involving surgeons. Many of the current aspects of the Australian uniform evidence law in relation to expert testimony were based on the Federal Rules of Evidence promulgated in the United States in 1975. We will discuss some of the problems of expert evidence in surgical matters, particularly in New South Wales, and offer some thoughts on how the so-called Daubert trilogy could form a basis on which to re-examine the concept of an "expert". Our analysis offers suggestions for further improvements to the process of adducing expert evidence in claims involving surgical matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Supplemental Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
