Michael John Aouad & Anor V. Inspector-General Of Police (1954)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West Africa Court of Appeal

Evidence—Evidence Ordinance, section 56—”Expert”.

Facts

Section 56 of the Evidence Ordinance reads as follows:—

“(1) When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, native law or custom, or of science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, native law or custom, or science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, are relevant facts.

“(2) Such persons are called experts.”
The appellants were convicted by a Magistrate of an offence under section 427 of the Criminal Code (receiving) relating to certain ore, on the nature of which a person holding office as an Inspector of Mines under the Minerals Ordinance was called by the prosecution as an expert and gave evidence of the office he held and the tests he had made to ascertain the nature of the ore, but was not crossexamined on those tests or on his qualifications.

In the appeal from the Magistrate to the Supreme Court the question of his being an ” expert ” was raised for the first time and decided against the appellants, who appealed further.

Held

The nature and duties of the witness’s public office and the technical or scientific tests he made, which were not challenged, constituted prima facie evidence of his qualification to be admitted as an expert witness.

Appeal dismissed.