What is the test for admitting expert evidence at a criminal trial?

Saskatchewan, Canada


The following excerpt is from Quintal v. Datta and Skochylas, 1988 CanLII 5084 (SK CA):

To justify the admission of expert evidence two elements must co-exist: 1. The subject matter of the inquiry must be such that ordinary people are unlikely to form a correct judgment about it, if unassisted by persons with special knowledge; 2. The witness offering expert evidence must have gained his special knowledge by a course of study or previous habit which secures his habitual familiarity with the matter in hand. See: Kelliher v. Smith, 1931 CanLII 1 (SCC), [1931] S.C.R. 672, at 684.

Other Questions


What is the evidential standard for admission of evidence at trial where issues of trial fairness are concerned? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the standard for a trial judge to accept all the evidence presented to the court? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Can a defendant at trial advance the defence of misrepresentation at trial? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to put the accused on trial? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Does the trial judge err in allowing the respondent to introduce parol evidence? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Can evidence of a chemical analysis of a sample taken after the 2-hour period be used in evidence? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the legal test for admitting fresh evidence in a personal injury case? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
In what circumstances will the trial judge allow the parents of a plaintiff to participate in the trial? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
How has the jury been instructed in a sexual assault trial to consider corroboration evidence? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
In what circumstances will a retired judge allow evidence to be called after the summing-up of a criminal case? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.