LexInter | September 18, 2009 | 0 Comments


The expert who has taken the initiative to obtain the opinion of another technician in a specialty distinct from his own must bring this opinion to the attention of the parties before filing the report itself so that they are able to to discuss it in front of him, and it is up to the party to whom the report of the technician that the expert has joined has been communicated to contest his conclusions by saying to the expert (1 st Civ., October 15, 1996 , Bull., I, n ° 354, p. 248; 2 nd Civ., May 16, 2002, Bull., II, n ° 101, p. 80; in the same sense, 2 nd Civ., January 16, 2003, Bull., II, n ° 5, p. 5, in the event that the expert had his personal work validated by an academic, without submitting to the parties or annexing to his report the opinion he had requested). Likewise, the expert, who has gathered information from knowledgeable people, must submit the content of these hearings and documents to the parties in order to enable them to be able to discuss them contradictorily before the filing of his report (2 nd Civ., December 5, 2002, Bull., II, n ° 278, p. 220; Com., February 6, 2001, appeal n ° 97-18.264; 2 nd Civ., January 16, 2003, Bull., II, n ° 5, p. 5, already cited). And, legally justifies its decision refusing to cancel the expert’s report, which is based on the opinion of a “sapper” consulted by the expert, the court of appeal which notes that the findings and investigations carried out by this specialist in charge of assisting the expert, have been at meetings to which all the parties have been invited, in accordance with the principle of contradiction, that it is not justified that the written statements or verbal documents did not receive a response and that the legal expert supervised all the operations during contradictory meetings (3 rdCiv., November 4, 1999, Bull., III, n ° 210, p. 147). We should add that the opinions requested by the expert must be appended to his report.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Reload Image