Law Commission recommends “reliability test” for expert evidence

The Law Commission has recommend that expert evidence in criminal trials should be subject to a new “reliability-based admissibility test” to determine whether it was sufficiently reliable to be placed before a jury.

The test, the Law Commission suggested, would only need to be applied in “appropriate cases” rather than routinely and would mean that expert opinion evidence would not be admitted unless it was adjudged to be sufficiently reliable to go before a jury.

The Commission has produced a draft bill setting out the admissibility test that judges would apply to exclude unreliable expert evidence and providing guidance for judges when applying the test.

The Bill also codifies the existing aspects of the present law to enable all of the admissibility requirements for expert evidence to be set out in a single Act of Parliament and carry equal authority. The Bill also includes a number of procedural rules and provisions which would give the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee the power to create further procedural rules, to supplement the provisions in the Bill.

“The recommendations in the report and the provisions in the Bill would establish a proper framework in criminal proceedings for screening expert evidence at the admissibility stage," the Law Commission said.

"They would also encourage higher standards amongst expert witnesses, and the specialists on whom they rely, resulting in expert evidence of greater reliability being tendered for admission. Juries would be less likely to reach their conclusions on unreliable evidence and there would be fewer miscarriages of justice, which would result in greater public confidence in the criminal justice system.”

To see the law Commission's final recommendations and draft Criminal Evidence (Experts) Bill, click on the following link: ExpertsBill