A más eljárásban kirendelt szakértő véleményének felhasználása a polgári perben

Absztrakt

The national legislature has elevated the common judicial practice of using expert opinions prepared in other proceedings to the level of law, allowing the party presenting evidence to utilize an expert opinion relevant to the same professional matter from a prior case in the ongoing litigation. The objective is to expedite proceedings and resolve disputes in a timely and efficient manner. Under the prior regulations, recurrent use of such expert opinions could be considered as a document, and the drafter could be interrogated as a witness, while present method of expert proof elevates the draftsman to the level of the expert appointed by the Civile Procedure, so predominantly it also shares its place in the litigation. This paper examines the inception of expert opinion utilization, the disclosure and supplementation of expert opinions, and the exclusion of concurrent applications of experts in legal proceedings. It aims to highlight the challenges introduced by the introduction of these rules, including issues related to evidentiary interests, the utilization and potential conflicts arising from contradictory expert opinions from other proceedings, and the ambiguity surrounding the submission date. These challenges can be traced back to the fact that the national legislature did not adequately consider the unique features of this method of expert evidence and seeks to evaluate the legal fate of previously prepared expert opinions based on the criteria established for expert opinion preparation. To address potential issues (de lege feranda), the author proposes the option of submitting a motion to disqualify expert opinions prepared in separate proceedings.