II UKN 590/98
Généré par l'IA
Supreme Court quashes appeal judgment for failing to resolve expert opinion contradictions via oral clarification under Civil Procedure Code.
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe Supreme Court quashed the appellate court's judgment and remanded the case for a new decision on costs. The applicant argued that contradictions between expert opinions and his treating physician's report required an oral clarification under the Civil Procedure Code. The court held that the appellate court improperly relied on conflicting expert opinions without first resolving these discrepancies through an oral supplement, violating procedural fairness.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAArt. 381 KPC; Art. 286 KPC: If a court of second instance admits evidence creating doubts regarding expert opinions from the first instance, it must resolve these doubts, at least by requesting an oral clarification of the written opinion.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IA
Civil Procedure Code
expert opinion contradictions
oral clarification requirement
second instance procedure
evidence assessment rules
injury compensation case
procedural fairness violation
Dispositions légales citées
Généré par l'IAart. 381 KPC
art. 286 KPC
art. 233 § 1 KPC
art. 382 KPC
art. 393 § 1 KPC
art. 108 § 2 KPC