scholarly journals Forms of Expert Knowledge Application in Land Disputes Settlement

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
O. V. Zhukova

When considering land disputes, a court examines a large amount of evidence. In this forensic land survey expertise has taken a special place since its findings often form the basis of the court decision. The correct and prompt consideration of the dispute depends on the quality work of an expert.The paper reviews a range of problems emerging when appointing a land survey expertise, preparing materials for the forensic examination, assessing forensic expert opinions and other evidence by the court. Inter alia, it is essential to correctly determine the type of examination, the list of necessary documents to conduct it, to estimate the duration of the study. The author reveals the possibilities of expansion of a specialist’s advisory activities at the expertise appointment stage to reduce the time of its conduct.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 78-89
Author(s):  
O. V. Zhukova

Land disputes considered by the courts are very diverse. A common feature of such cases is the involvement of an expert land surveyor to resolve issues that go beyond the legal knowledge. Expert opinion findings frequently form the basis of a court decision since in land disputes land survey expertise often predetermines the decision on a case. In the article a range of significantly different civil disputes with plots as objects is given, their classification is proposed. It is explained that for each type of the disputes special land survey knowledge is necessary. Questions are presented which can be resolved by conducting a forensic land survey expertise as well as some examples of decisions from court practice with demonstrations of a judge’s legal competence realization on the one hand and expert land surveyor – on the other.



2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 6-14
Author(s):  
E. R. Rossinskaya

When examining legal, organizational and methodological issues of forensic expertise for the protection of intellectual property the most common forensic examinations are authorship investigation, computer forensic examination, phonoscopic, linguistic, engineering, patent examinations as well as examination of documents. Comparative analysis of the procedural status of an expert in various types of process and in the federal law “On State Forensic Expert Activities in the Russian Federation” is given. Specialist’s procedural position and the evidentiary value of the results of his participation in various types of proceedings in the cases of this category are analysed. Attention is paid to organizational and legal issues of conducting forensic examinations in non-state expert organizations. Based on the analysis of an array of expert opinions, specialists’ opinions and advice on issues related to intellectual property performed in more than 50 nongovernmental organizations positioning themselves as forensic and on monitoring of the websites of these organizations on the Internet, it has been established that the quality of opinions and consultations has little to do with the information provided on the sites. Scientists and specialists for whom forensic expert activity is not the primary one are often involved in conducting forensic examinations in these organizations. They do not know the basics of substantive and procedural law; they do not always realize the legal consequences of their opinions for the participants in court proceedings and exceed their competence. In context of a specific example typical mistakes in cases related to the protection of intellectual property often made by non-state experts are shown. Although the legislator declares the unity of the scientific and methodological approach to expert practice, professional training and the specialization of experts, these requirements often are not met. There is no unity of forensic expert techniques developed in different departments. For other participants in legal proceedings these techniques are practically inaccessible and their testing and implementation are still not often done at the interdepartmental level. The importance of the activities of the Technical Committee for Standardization TC 134 “Forensic examination” is emphasized.



2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 152-159
Author(s):  
L. V. Lazareva ◽  
S. V. Pokrovskiy

The paper discusses the issues of using expert opinions, which are ambiguously interpreted in the theory of criminal procedural evidence. Particular attention is given to the study of the circumstances influencing the formation of the expert’s conclusions. It is shown that the existing legal mechanisms do not sufficiently regulate certain issues of forensic expert activity. Analyzing forensic practice, the authors draw attention to the observance of the conditions under which the expert opinion acquires evidentiary value. It was revealed that the irrefutability of expert conclusions is influenced not only by the competence of a forensic expert, but also by the scientific and methodological support of forensic expert activity. The authors criticize the position according to which an expert can involve a specialist when formulating the conclusions of the examination. The paper proposes some ways for improving the comprehensiveness and objectivity of the expert research, ensuring the completeness, as well as the validity and reliability of the conclusions made by the expert. Taking into account the modern achievements of forensic examination, the necessity of applying a unified approach to the training of forensic experts of different specializations, as well as the methodological support of this field of activity, is substantiated.



2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 60-75
Author(s):  
E. V. Vaske ◽  
F. S. Safuanov ◽  
T. N. Sekerazh

The article analyses errors when appointing and conducting a forensic examination of disputes related to children’s upbringing. When summarizing expert practice in this category of civil cases (based on the study of 97 expert opinions on forensic psychological examination), the most significant errors were identified: incorrect determination of the type of expertise (including the appointment of psychological and pedagogical expertise which does not have a methodological basis as forensic examination), non-compliance with the qualification requirements to a forensic expert and, as a result, the introduction of an improper subject of forensic expert activity into the judicial process, an expert’s going beyond the limits of specialized knowledge and procedural powers, the incompleteness of research, the use of invalid research methods and techniques, and other methodological violations, associated with the incorrect assessment of the results of psychological diagnostics, inaccurate phenomenological analysis of essential phenomena of child-parent relations.Considering that due to the facts to be proved are essential for deciding on a case, the expert’s opinion is of particular importance and can significantly affect the formation of the court’s inner conviction, which means that expert errors significantly increase the risk of judicial errors. The article substantiates the urgent necessity of the early enactment of a legal act regulating experts’ responsibility for the level of their qualifications and setting professional requirements to experts.



2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 242
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Khrystov ◽  
Vladyslav Lipynskyi

The article is devoted to the economic and legal comparative analysis of judicial expert activities. The issues concerning the problems of quality assurance of the expert activities, harmonization and convergence of the understanding of the possibilities of judicial economic expertise in solving problems of justice, taking into account economic conditions. As a first step to creating a general theoretical development for judicial economic expertise could be the creation of a list of vocabulary of basic terms of forensic economic expertise. The legislation of Ukraine, which regulates activities of forensic experts, is as follows: the Law of Ukraine “On Forensic Examination”, “Instruction on Conducting Forensic Examination”, “Procedure for Certification and Official Registration of Forensic Examinations Procedure”, “Some Issues of Provision of Paid Services by Research Institutions on Forensic Examination of the Ministry of Justice”, “On Approval of the Instructions on Procedure and Amount of Reimbursement and Compensation to Individuals Invited by Inquiry Agencies, Pretrial Investigation Agencies, Procuracy, Courts or Authorities that Oversee Cases of Administrative Violations, and Payments to Governmental Research Institutions on Forensic Examination for Expert and Specialized Services Provided by their Employees” approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, and a set of multi-agency orders. The common features include the existence of department specialized forensic expert institutions, which are entrusted to conduct an examination as follows: specialized research institutes of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and the Ministry of Healthcare, expert services of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Security Service of Ukraine, etc. Moreover, forensic examinations, which are often arranged in criminal proceedings and sometimes in administrative proceedings, can be carried out exclusively by forensic experts who are employees of such institutions. At the same time, the law provides for the possibility of carrying out forensic expert activity on a business basis, on the ground of special authorization, as well as onetime agreements, by citizens who have the qualification of a forensic expert, which is often used in administrative proceedings. Neither a judge nor any other persons, who are involved in administrative or criminal procedures, have this kind of expert knowledge. By virtue of the knowledge that is converted by forensic experts in the source of evidence, important issues of a case are resolved that would be impossible without forensic expertise. In legal science, there is an idea that expert activity, due to its specificity, is much wider than expert procedure regardless of the fact whether it is carried out in administrative or criminal procedures.



2018 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 194-202
Author(s):  
O. P. Uhrovetskyi ◽  
O. O. Sviderskyi

The authors allocate in administrative proceedings in cases of administrative offenses among other participants to a forensic expert who takes a special place in this process and give a description of legal status of forensic expert in cases on administrative offenses taking into account the peculiarities of expert involving stage in administrative proceedings. The authors emphasize that at various stages of administrative proceedings a forensic expert performs one function: performing examination. At the central stage of administrative proceedings, namely consideration of the case on an administrative offense and adoption of the resolution therein by authorized authority to consider an administrative offense. If there is a need to use of special knowledge, forensic examination is assigned and opportunity is provided to expert to exercise procedural rights and obligations and submit examination conclusion as a result of expert research. Decision on forensic examination assignment in cases of administrative offenses in the jurisdiction is usually performed in resolutions of the authorized authority (official) that is in charge of proceedings administrative offense. Expert conclusion is an independent means of proof in administrative proceedings. Structure complexity of expert conclusion as a procedural document lies in the fact that it derives from the structure of a special forensic research, since it reflects its features. Expert conclusion is subject to investigation and verification by the court and actual data contained therein are judged by general rules, since they are actual data about certain circumstances of objective reality. It is concluded that participation of expert in proceedings on administrative offenses at the present stage is as fully possible realized at the second central stage of proceedings in consideration of case on administrative offense.



2016 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 180-188
Author(s):  
M. V. Shepitko

The article deals with the problems of counteracting the provision of an intentionally misleading conclusion by an expert. It analyzes the rights, obligations and liabilities of an expert. The research focuses on the fact that a forensic expert differs from other participants to criminal legal proceedings - he/she has special knowledge. According to his/her legal status an expert is engaged in this activity on a permanent basis using the powers given by the Law of Ukraine «On forensic examination» and procedural laws. The article pays particular attention to the forms of obligations undertaken by an expert in the course of a pretrial investigation and trial - warning of criminal liability, the oath by an expert. With this regard the article specifies common and distinctive traits of the abovementioned oaths showing different purposes that the lawmaker had in mind while drafting them. It is important to point out to the conclusion that the mechanism of counteracting the provision of an intentionally misleading conclusion by an expert is a means of psychological influence. This episode may indicate a possibility of excessive intimidation of this participant of the criminal legal proceedings.



2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 399-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Capelo ◽  
Sandra Mesquita ◽  
José Carlos Costa ◽  
Sílvia Ribeiro ◽  
Pedro Arsénio ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document