The common criticism of expert witnesses including forensic accountants is that they are overly partisan and fail to provide the court with a neutral or independent opinion. Previous cases had indicated judges are getting frustrated when there is deliberate partisanship. (Keegan v. Minneapolis and St. Louis R.R., 1899) This could be drawn from my experience where I could have 'acquaintances or friends' to help me and provide evidence in that assists me in situations. To prevent such partisanship to occur I think a few strategies could be implemented.
Firstly since the expert witnesses act most as an advocate for their client's case, the court should implement a procedure rule where forensic accountant expert witnesses should be appointed by the court and declare the duty of a forensic accountant expert witness in relation to the court. The implementation would diminish the level of bias that may occur since they are not acting on behalf of a client, and also they have a duty of care to perform in court (refer to APES 215). Secondly, if parties are required to seek expert evidence in trial, they are required to seek directions from the court, and its the courts discretion to determine whether it should be required.
By implementing this rule into the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules in Queensland, I believe this will not only prevent partisanship but will enable expert witnesses like forensic accountants to provide more effective evidence for the court.
Reference:
Keegan v Minneapolis & St Louis RR, 78 NW 965
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
No comments:
Post a Comment