Criminal Justice Process in Malaysia
witnesses and their practice, and to provide an update on some of the issues set out in the second edition of the Guide. 1.4 As before, the purpose is simply to provide a digest and Experts will still need to understand the CPR and the legal principles set out in this Addendum. However, it is hoped that the Addendum will serve as a useful update with regard to relevant issues and a convenient starting point for more detailed consideration.
2. 2.1
Expert Immunity Expert immunity is mentioned in section 7.2 of the Guide and the general principle is that expert witnesses are immune from civil claims. This is a well established principle aimed at ensuring that experts give evidence freely and independently.
2.2
The position is less clear following a few recent decisions. In Philips v Symes [2004] EWHC 2330 the court found not only that an Expert could be joined as a respondent, but that he could also be made liable for a party's costs if he has acted "recklessly or in flagrant disregard of his duties to the court".
2.3
In the highly publicised case of General Medical Council v Meadow [2006] EWCA Civ 1390, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court's decision to extend the immunity from suit to disciplinary proceedings. As a result, Experts may be vulnerable to disciplinary proceedings if it can be shown that their evidence in court demonstrates they are not fit to practice in a particular discipline.
2.4
Overall, this emphasises the need to ensure that great care is taken and the highest standards are observed in giving evidence. When giving evidence an Expert must bear this in mind. Any issues should be discussed with the legal representatives as appropriate. The Expert's duties to the client and the Court are set out in section 7 of the Guide.
3. 3.1
Legal Privilege The issues concerning legal privilege are set out in various sections of the Guide. Section 4.3 of the Guide deals with privilege and disclosure and section 6.3 of the
2. 2.1
Expert Immunity Expert immunity is mentioned in section 7.2 of the Guide and the general principle is that expert witnesses are immune from civil claims. This is a well established principle aimed at ensuring that experts give evidence freely and independently.
2.2
The position is less clear following a few recent decisions. In Philips v Symes [2004] EWHC 2330 the court found not only that an Expert could be joined as a respondent, but that he could also be made liable for a party's costs if he has acted "recklessly or in flagrant disregard of his duties to the court".
2.3
In the highly publicised case of General Medical Council v Meadow [2006] EWCA Civ 1390, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court's decision to extend the immunity from suit to disciplinary proceedings. As a result, Experts may be vulnerable to disciplinary proceedings if it can be shown that their evidence in court demonstrates they are not fit to practice in a particular discipline.
2.4
Overall, this emphasises the need to ensure that great care is taken and the highest standards are observed in giving evidence. When giving evidence an Expert must bear this in mind. Any issues should be discussed with the legal representatives as appropriate. The Expert's duties to the client and the Court are set out in section 7 of the Guide.
3. 3.1
Legal Privilege The issues concerning legal privilege are set out in various sections of the Guide. Section 4.3 of the Guide deals with privilege and disclosure and section 6.3 of the