我國商業事件審理法於2021年新引進「專家證人制度」，立法理由主要在於緩和傳統民事鑑定制度中，對機關鑑定無法為具結，以及甚少對鑑定人為訊問等理由。然因我國訴訟法之規範乃源自大陸法系，與英美法系有諸多不同，在此背景下，商業事件審理法並未將鑑定人制度棄置，我國乃發生現代先進國家少見之「同時並存」專家證人制度與鑑定人制度情形，使民事程序法制度有重大變革。<br>除商業事件審理法外，晚近其他程序法修法趨勢亦逐步擴大各式專家於法庭之運用。本文將以比較法上專家證人制度之發展為研究核心，並藉以討論往後我國商業事件審理法，甚或民事訴訟法運用專家證人制度可能遭遇的爭議或難題，並初步就專家證人於我國民事程序法之制度建構，提出可供參考之評估與檢討。

Taiwan’s Commercial Case Adjudication Act introduced the“expert witness system”in 2021. The primary legislative rationale was to remedy the deficiencies of the traditional civil court-appointed expert system, such as the inability of institutional expert bodies to sign a written oath and the rare opportunities to examine experts in court. However, because Taiwan’s procedural law is rooted in the Civil law system, which differs significantly from the Common Law system, the Commercial Case Adjudication Act did not abandon the traditional court-appointed expert. Consequently, Taiwan has experienced a dual-track arrangement where both the expert witness and court-appointed expert co-exist simultaneously, a phenomenon rarely seen in modern developed jurisdictions, thereby bringing about a significant transformation in civil procedural law.<br>Beyond the Commercial Case Adjudication Act, recent reform trends in other procedural laws also demonstrate a gradual expansion of the role of various experts in the courtroom. Centering on the development of the expert witness system from a comparative law perspective, this article discusses potential disputes and challenges that may arise in the future application of this system under Taiwan’s Commercial Case Adjudication Act and Code of Civil Procedure. Furthermore, it offers a preliminary evaluation and review regarding the institutional framework of expert witnesses within Taiwan’s civil procedural law, providing normative recommendations for reference.