It sounds like a commercial but you can help break the logjam by reading Dr. Ruth M. Corbin’s paper on how we experts are helping. (Ref. 1) Then you suggest what might be included in follow-up studies to her pilot study of 152 experts.
You might remember from my blog earlier this week that the logjam is the different perspective of expert evidence held by the courts as distinct from the experts. (Ref. 2)
Ruth calls for follow-up research on the following questions:
- Empirical research to strengthen the evidence-based foundation of future policy
- Economical modeling to complement the Supreme Court’s call for a “cost-benefit” analysis of expert testimony, and,
- Practical steps toward creating a forum for direct communication between experts and courts
We’ve got to get Atlantic Canada input to these follow-up studies – there’s no information on the role we had in the earlier studies.
In my earlier blog, I suggested including the following in follow-up studies: :
- Future studies and perspectives must be evidence-based. I was prompted to suggest this on learning that the court’s view of expert evidence as revealed in the pilot studies was not so evidence-based. It was this view as I understood it that influenced the policy on rules governing experts
- Economic modelling to complement the Supreme Court’s call for a “cost-benefit” analysis of expert testimony must include an identification of the principles governing the cost control of civil litigation involving experts. You can’t do a reliable cost-benefit analysis without accurate expert costs arising from conformance to these principles.
- The role of the middle man, the advocate, in direct communications between experts and courts must be carefully spelled out.
Read Dr. Corbin’s paper – you’re in for a treat -, and possibly my blog and take on the situation, then send your comments to her. Don’t be too refined, just get something out there like in brain storming. Send your comments and suggestions to firstname.lastname@example.org I found Dr. Corbin’s assistant very good, responding quite quickly to my queries and promptly forwarding comment onto Ruth.
- Corbin, Ruth M., Chair, Corbin Partners Inc. and Adjunct Professor, Osgoode Hall School, Toronto, Breaking the Expert Evidence Logjam: Experts Weigh In, presented at Expert Witness Forum East, Toronto, February, 2018 (Google the paper and Ruth’s name)
- How experts are helping break the expert evidence logjam. Posted April 30, 2018