| 英文摘要 |
In antitrust litigation, issues such as how the relevant market for the goods and services in question is defined and whether the parties’ restrictive behaviour has the effect of excluding or restricting competition often become the focus of factual disputes between the parties. These factual issues are not ordinary factual issues, but scientific factual issues, which need to be argued through and proved by economic analysis, sociological analysis and other scientific methods. In order to assist the court in ascertaining the facts of the case, the parties may apply for expert opinions from professionally qualified experts to prove the facts asserted. However, the court needs to define the qualifications of the expert witnesses in order to select experts who can truly assist in the fact-finding process. On the other hand, the court also needs to establish criteria for reviewing and assessing the credibility and admissibility of expert witness testimony, and ultimately decide whether or not to admit the expert opinion. Jurisprudence experts cannot be expert witnesses who argue scientific facts; judges can refer to the views of jurisprudence experts in their judgements to enhance the reasoning of the judgement, but laws should still be interpreted by judges. |
