Reflection Review: Hill v Dunn [2019] NSWSC 419

This report discusses the legal framework, role of expert witnesses, courtroom etiquette, and procedural issues in the case of Hill v Dunn [2019] NSWSC 419.

REFLECTION REVIEW 0
LAW AND THE COURTS
APRIL 12, 2019
STUDENT DETAILS:

REFLECTION REVIEW 1
Civil Case: Hill v Dunn [2019] NSWSC 419
The advocates, parties, witnesses, and jurors should observe well-mannered and
orderly actions. As per the rules related to courtroom etiquette, it is required that people
should be on right time. They should behave properly and politely with the judges and staff
of court. This report states the case of Hill v Dunn [2019] NSWSC 419. In the following
report legal framework surrounding the court proceedings, role of witness specifically expert
witness providing evidence, courtroom etiquette and procedural issues and principles inherent
in the court process is discussed and critically examined.
The legal framework involves the expert’s obligations to help the court over the cases
within the proficiency as mentioned in the Civil Procedure Rules. As per these obligations of
the expert, it is required by the experts that they should render the independent evidence,
unaffected by the proceeding’s pressure (Shamir, 2017). I strongly believe that this duty of
expert overrules the obligations to the related lawyer or the legal representative. It is required
by the experts that they should have knowledge of Part 35 of the Rules and annexed
directions related to the practice. For fulfil the duties, it is required by the experts that-
1. They should state the assumption, theory and fact on which opinions have been made.
2. They should clearly state the situation when they are not able to get the specific
opinion.
3. They should not commit the significant facts from considerations that may or else
detract from the opinions.
4. They are required to give the notifications of changes to all the parties.
5. They are required to make the statement of truth in the report (Abadi & Kalkoshki,
2017).
I came to know that as an expert witness, it is required to give personal opinions or views
on the expertise matter or technological matter within the area of practice. The Expert witness
is present in proceedings to describe the complex technical problems, not to affect the jury or
judges (Aitamurto & Landemore, 2015). The expert witness has a significant role under the
legal system. The Supreme Court relies on expert witness’s evidence in most of the civil
matters to define technical cases and render the opinions to the judge in court. By considering
the case of Hill v Dunn [2019] NSWSC 419, I can say that in a case where a person is acting
as civil expert, then that that person would have to have regard to various legal
considerations. The expert is required to follow the clearly strict legal framework (Burley,
2017).
In Hill v Dunn [2019] NSWSC 419 summarised the applicable laws in regarding
tolerability of expert evidence as the exceptions to rules related to opinion. After analysing
this case I realised that in a case where the evidence tendered as expert opinions, evidence is
to be permissible:
1. This should be stated or agreed that there is the area of particular knowledge.
2. There should be the recognised feature of that area where it is stated by the witness
that by reason of particular guidance, learning or experiences, the witnesses have
become the experts.
3. to the extent that the opinions are depended on the facts “experimented” by the
experts, they should be recognised and significantly stated by the experts
4. the opinions submitted to the judges of court should be “wholly or substantially based
on the expert knowledge of the witness
5. to the degree that the opinions are depended on “supposed” or “established” facts,
they should be recognised and proved in the different manner

REFLECTION REVIEW 2
this should be stated that the fact on that the opinions are depended form the
appropriate foundations for this; and an evidence of expert should describe how the
area of “specific understanding” where a witness is expert, and on which the opinions
are “completely and significantly depended” applies to a fact supposed or
experimented so as to make the opinions submitted (Sanchez, 2016).
I also came to know that etiquette in the courtroom is very essential. One should act in
the orderly and civil way at the time of presenting in courtroom. It is required to keep the
proper standard of dress code and conduct. I felt that one should wait in a public seating area
placed in the back of court until the case is stated (Hedemann-Robinson, 2015). The
courtroom etiquette’s rule should be adopted by each person who joins the court involving
the communal. If this etiquette is not adopted, the judges of Supreme Court can order to leave
the court or, in more severe matters, the fine or penalty can be imposed. This case stated that
the judges and the formalities of courtroom may be unapproachable. In the case of Hill v
Dunn [2019] NSWSC 41, the lawyer advised the defendant to attend court hearing through
phone at 2 pm. The court tried to contact defendant buy could not establish connection. In
this way, the hearing could not conduct on time (Chatenet, 2017).
As per the above analysis, I can concluded that to make sure one should know what to
expect in Supreme Court. It is required to have the knowledge about the court system prior to
attending the case. It is recommended that to attend the court hearing prior to personal matter
to have the knowledge of general procedure of the hearing in court. One must arrive early to
court to permit sufficient time to check place and time of hearing in court.

REFLECTION REVIEW 3
Reference
Abadi, M. H., & Kalkoshki, A. A. (2017). Formalities and Regulations Governing the
Arbitration Proceedings in International Law. J. Pol. & L., 10, 108.
Aitamurto, T., & Landemore, H. E. (2015). Five design principles for crowdsourced
policymaking: Assessing the case of crowdsourced off-road traffic law in
Finland. Journal of Social Media for Organizations, 2(1), 1-19.
Burley, A. M. S. (2017). International law and international relations theory: a dual agenda.
New York: Routledge.
Chatenet, M. (2017). Etiquette and Architecture at the Court of the Last Valois. In Court
Festivals of the European Renaissance, 34(9), pp. 100-124
Hedemann-Robinson, M. (2015). Enforcement of European Union environmental law: legal
issues and challenges. New York: Routledge.
Sanchez, M. S. (2016). ‘She Grows Careless’: The Infanta Catalina Micaela and Spanish
Etiquette at the Court of Savoy. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Shamir, R. (2017). Suspended in space: Bedouins under the law of Israel. New York:
Routledge.