The purpose of this master thesis is to investigate how the current use of expert appraisals in chapter 19 of the Danish administration act of justice corresponds to the concept of liberation of evidence. Furthermore, the new rules in law reform no. 1725 of 27th of December 2016 will be analyzed, with the purpose of finding out how these new rules will affect future legal practice.
Chapter 1 contains the introduction and a section on the legal method.
In chapter 2 the concept of liberation of evidence is described and analyzed. It can be concluded, that the liberation of evidence meant that the assessment of evidence and the submission of evi-dence is unbound. Therefore, there should be no legal boundaries to submit evidence or to assess the evidence.
In chapter 3 the legal state regarding unilateral expert reports is described. Before 2007 the courts did not allow submission of unilateral expert reports of any kind. In 2007 the submission of such a report that was obtained before the trail was allowed. It was this legal practice, which was the in-centive behind the law reform. Chapter 3 also contains an analysis of the new rules regarding the §§ 209a and 341a. The interpretation of the purpose of the rules showed that the admittance to submit unilateral expert reports is not as wide as the wording of the rules suggests.
In chapter 4 the rules regarding the administration act of justice chapter 19 are described. The way to obtain an expert appraisal is a very impartial, transparent and controlled process. Furthermore, chapter 4 contains an analysis of the rules regarding § 198 section 1, 1st period and § 209 of the law reform. Both rules are a codification of legal practice.
Chapter 5 is an analysis of how the new rules regarding unilateral expert reports harmonizes with the purpose of the rules regarding the expert appraisal. The conclusion is made the expert appraisal in chapter 19 is deemed more exclusive than the unilateral expert reports even after the admittance of such reports have been expanded with law reform no. 1725.
Chapter 6 is a discussion on how the exclusivity of the expert appraisal in chapter 19 of the admin-istration act of justice harmonizes with the concept of liberation of evidence. The conclusion is made that it is fair to assume that there must be some modifications to the liberation of evidence, to ensure an equal and impartial system, but it also concludes that this fact does not correspond with the purpose of liberation of evidence.
Finally, it can be concluded that the expert appraisal in chapter 19 of the Danish administration act of justice continually is perceived as an exclusive type of evidence, whereas the unilateral expert reports will serve as a procedural tool, to the expert appraisal. Furthermore, it is concluded that the exclusivity of the expert appraisal is not agreement with the concept of liberation of evidence.