Assessors assisting judges

Samuel T. Cogley

What's the name of an expert who assists a Judge? Not an expert witness but someone there for the Judge specifically for example I think Clarke J may had one during some of the Ranbaxy litigation.

Thanks in Advance.

BlueLass

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

What's the name of an expert who assists a Judge? Not an expert witness but someone there for the Judge specifically for example I think Clarke J may had one during some of the Ranbaxy litigation.

Thanks in Advance.

Do you mean the crier?

Mr. Incognito

You mean the Registrar?

There are tipstaff also

CIARAN_BOYLE

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

What's the name of an expert who assists a Judge? Not an expert witness but someone there for the Judge specifically for example I think Clarke J may had one during some of the Ranbaxy litigation.

Thanks in Advance.

I don't think a judge is allowed bring in his own experts on a case.

Robbo

Amicus curiae?

Peregrinus

"Assessor" is the term I've heard. It's rare, but it does happen in, e.g., trials involving complex patent matters where the judge will be assisted by an assessor who will help him or her grapple with technical expert evidence. The assessor will have relevant expertise/qualifications, and generally will be somebody who is (at least) as well-qualified/recognised as the expert witnesses being wheeled out by the parties.

Samuel T. Cogley

Robbo wrote: »

Amicus curiae?

Pretty sure that's it thanks Robbo. I vaguely remember a lecture given by Clarke J explaining the principle and that lecture was on Ranbaxy and Art 69 and all that good stuff on patent claim construction plus a bit of, you know, degree level chemistry thrown in as everyone knows that*.


*And I say that with the highest level of respect the man is extremely intelligent who manages to make his subject matter accessible to even the dullest of law students.

Samuel T. Cogley

Thanks Peregrinus - I'm sure you're probably familiar with the case but for anyone who isn't it was Ireland's chance to bring it's patent laws inline with EU law which had been informed in no small part by the Catnic - Improver (where Germany found the other way to the UK) - Kirwin Amgen. So I think no stone was left unturned, especially as the ratio is basically saying* it's someone 'skilled in the art' that has to interpret the patent.

*Putting in my crude terms.

Also now I think it was Assessor but thanks to all trying to help!

Peregrinus

I think the amicus curiae is a bit different. An amicus is appointed by the court to offer arguments that no party to the litigation wants to offer or has an interest in offering, but the court reckons there's a public interest in having offered. For example, suppose litigation goes to the Supreme Court on the question of whether a particular law is unconstitutional. One side argues that it's unconstitutional for this reason, the other side argues that it's unconstitutional for that reason, but nobody wants to argue that it's not unconstitutional at all. The court might appoint an amicus to argue that case.

The amicus puts arguments to the court but doesn't usually, lead any evidence. Whereas an assessor doesn't put arguments, but assists the judge in considering the arguments put by the parties.

Samuel T. Cogley

That's cleared that up. Thanks a million everyone!

GM228

Peregrinus wrote: »

"Assessor" is the term I've heard. It's rare, but it does happen in, e.g., trials involving complex patent matters where the judge will be assisted by an assessor who will help him or her grapple with technical expert evidence. The assessor will have relevant expertise/qualifications, and generally will be somebody who is (at least) as well-qualified/recognised as the expert witnesses being wheeled out by the parties.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Also now I think it was Assessor but thanks to all trying to help!

As Peregrinus points out it is indeed "assessor", see S95 of the Patents Act 1992.

95.—(1) In an action or proceedings for infringement or revocation of a patent, or other proceedings under this Act, the Court may, if it thinks fit, and shall, on the request of all parties to the proceedings, call in the aid of an assessor specially qualified in the opinion of the Court, and try the case wholly or partially with his assistance.

(2) The Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, may, if it thinks fit, in any proceedings before it relating to a patent application or a patent call in the aid of an assessor as aforesaid.

(3) The remuneration, if any, to be paid to an assessor under this section shall be determined by the Court, the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, as may be appropriate, and be paid as part of the expenses incurred by the Minister in the administration of this Act.

Victor

What about ordinary cases - how do judges create their judgements? Is it a matter of simply dictating to a secretary or do they have researchers, etc. available to them to chase down legislation and case law (I realise that the parties will have drawn up much of this information).

nuac

Mod
Interesting thread, STC. Have amended thread title

GM228

Victor wrote: »

What about ordinary cases - how do judges create their judgements? Is it a matter of simply dictating to a secretary or do they have researchers, etc. available to them to chase down legislation and case law (I realise that the parties will have drawn up much of this information).

A lot of case law will be highlighted by the parties and then further researched by the judge.

Depending on the judge there will also be additional case law cited/considered for the first time in their judgement (which the parties didn't rely on) depending on his/her research abilities - Mr. Justice Clarke for example is very good at such and goes into extraordinary detail and history when doing so.

All judges are supplied with laptops (and printers) with access to all the usual DBs to aid their research.

All judges prepare their own judgements, but have support etc for such. All superior court judges have dictation software for preparing judgements. The Chief Justice, and each Supreme Court judge (aswell as the Presidents of the High Court, Circuit Court and District Court) all have a personal secretary for assistance, whilst all High Court judges share secretaries - 1 secretary per 6 judges.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.