In a recent decision of the High Court of Ireland, the court refused to admit a report by a purported expert, where there was insufficient evidence of his qualifications.
“In that report, there is no indication whatsoever that Mr.Fitzpatrick holds any qualification at all in relation to banking or financial matters. Nor isthere any statement that he has any experience in relation to banking or financialmatters. Broadly speaking, there are essentially two types of witnesses whose evidencecan be tendered to the Court. The first are witnesses as to fact, who can give evidence asto what they saw and heard and did at a particular time. The second category is expertevidence, where the expert due to his or her knowledge, qualifications and experience inthe relevant area, is permitted to give opinion evidence on the issue before the Court.Experts are the only people permitted to give opinion evidence before a Court. While it iscertainly true that there is no specific threshold which has to be met before a person canbe classed as being an expert, there must be some evidence before the Court that theperson proffered as an expert, does in fact have some expertise and experience in therelevant area upon which he or she proposes to give an opinion. In this case suchevidence is totally lacking. I simply do not know who Mr. Fitzpatrick is; what qualifications, if any, he may hold and what experience, if any, he may have in banking and financial matters.”
Link: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2019/2019IEHC841.html