論反壟斷訴訟中的專家證人

On Expert Witnesses in Antitrust Litigation

在反壟斷訴訟中，涉案商品服務的相關市場如何界定、當事方的限制性行為是否具有排除限制競爭效果等問題，往往成為雙方對事實爭議的焦點問題。而這些事實問題幷非普通的事實問題，而是科學事實問題，需要通過經濟學分析、社會學分析等科學方法加以論證。為輔助法庭對案件事實進行查明，雙方可以申請具有專業資質的專家提供專家意見或證詞，對所主張的事實加以論證。然而，法庭需要通過明確專家證人資質要求，來篩選真正能够對事實認定起到輔助作用的專家。另一方面，法庭還需要確立證詞可采性標準，審查評估專家證人證詞的可信度，最終决定對專家證人證詞是否采信。法學專家不能成為專家證人對科學事實進行論證，法官可以在判决書參考法學專家觀點來增強判决說理，但法律條文仍應由法官來解釋。

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.