Reflection Review: 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