ORCID: 0000-0003-0480-5394

DOI 10.37566/2707-6849-2019-3(28)-13





specialist of the department of work with permanent staff of the department of human resources of Lviv State University of Internal Affairs




The article is devoted to the study of the formation and development of the institute of expert in law, as well as the peculiarities of its legislative regulation and functioning in the law of the Anglo-Saxon legal family, in particular in countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and the Republic of South Africa.

It has been established that the institute of expert’s in law participation in the trial has deep historical roots and is known in Roman law under the name "amicus curiae", which literally means "a friend of the court". Under amicus curiae it could be deemed a person with the relevant professional knowledge in law and professional experience, whose task was to provide the court with relevant information in order to facilitate the consideration and proper resolution of the case in accordance with the legislation in force at that time.

The institute of amicus curiae was adopted and developed in the legislation of the Anglo-Saxon legal family from Roman law. The first confirmation of irs application can be found in the decisions of British courts already in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The "a friend of the court" institute (this is what it refers to as the law of the United Kingdom) rebelled as a third-party institution that did not act in the interests of the procedural parties, but gave legal conclusions on those aspects of the case which the parties did not pay attention to or which they had not notify the court of, emphasizing at the same time the authority and independence of the court, who always posess the final decision to accept or reject the expressed position.

Under the modern interpretation amicus curiae institute means a subject who does not take part in the trial as a party, but has exclusive legal or professional knowledge of an important topic that occurs in a particular case, and suggests that the court has a certain opinion, a position on this or that question, which promotes justification of the court by its motives in making a decision in a specific, usually difficult legal situation. It is important to note that the conclusion of "amicus curiae" is not binding on the court, but it gives more necessary information in one or another special area necessary for a fair judgment.

Key words: the participant of the trial, expert in law, amicus curiae, friend of the court, conclusion, civil proceedings.



Association Agreement between Ukraine, of the one part, and the European Union, the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the other part, dated 27.06.2014. URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Ukr.]

On the Strategy for the Reform of Judiciary, Judiciary and Related Legal Institutions for 2015-2020: Presidential Decree of May 20, 2015 No. 276/2015. URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019)  [Ukr.]

On the Judiciary and Status of Judges: Law of Ukraine of June 2, 2016 No. 1402-VIII. Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. 2016.  № 31.  Art. 545 [Ukr.]

On Amendments to the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine and other legislative acts: Law of Ukraine of October 3, 2017 No. 2147-VIII. Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.  2017.  № 48.  Art. 436  [Ukr.]

Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, March 18, 2004 (as amended). Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.  2004. № 40-42, 42.  Art. 492 [Ukr.]

Luspenyk D. Evidence in the Civil Procedure: What's New in the CPC and Why the Court Has the Right to Demand Evidence. URL: ba6687 (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Ukr.]

Zozulya N. Law expert: procedural status problem. URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Ukr.]

Korotka, N.O., Civil Status of Law Expert and His Opinion in the Field of Law as a Means of Evidence in the Civil Process. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhgorod National University. Series: Right.  2018.  Vip. 53. T. 1.  P. 97–100 [Ukr.]

Rebrish B. Yu.,  Rebrish A. S. Problems of the legal status of a legal expert in Ukraine. Comparative-analytical law.  2018.  № 4.  P. 136–140.  URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Ukr.]

Marschner H. Opinia przyjaciela sądu ('amicus curiae brief') w różnych systemach prawnych oraz w Polsce. URL: (accessed 28.03.2019) [Ukr.]

Simpson R. W.,  Vasaly  M. R.  The amicus brief: How to be a good friend of the court.   Chicago: American Bar Association, 2004.  275 р. [Engl.]

Krislov S. The Amicus Curiae Brief: From Friendship to Advocacy / S. Krislov. Yale Law Journal.  1963.  Vol. 72.  P. 694–721 [Engl.]

Mohan S. Ch. The Amicus Curiae: Friends No More?  Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. 2010. Vol. 2. P. 352–374 [Engl.]

Polivodsky O. The truth of monopoly does not exist. Law expert: procedural law or established practice enshrined in law? URL: (accessed 28.03.2019) [Ukr.]

G. Waipan, “Friend of the Court” (amicus curiae) in the Russian constitutional trial: who is he and why is he needed? URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Ukr.]

Council Directive 2000/78 / EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equality of conduct in the field of employment and occupation. URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Engl.].

Rules governing the conduct of proceedings of several provincial and local divisions of the High Court of South Africa amended with effect from 15 June 2009. URL:[26jun2009].pdf (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Engl.].

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of South Africa in the matter between the Children's Institute versus the Presiding Officer of the Children's Court of Krugersdorp and others. Decided on 9 October 2012. (Case CCT 69/12, ZACC 25). URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019). [Engl.]

Gambaryan A.S. Amicus Curiae Institute as a Means of Ensuring the Effectiveness of the Judicial Policy of the Republic of Armenia. URL: (accessed: 03/28/2019) [Engl.]

Konstanty O. V. “Amicus curiae” in the Administrative Procedure of Ukraine: Problems of Implementation. Legal scientific electronic journal. 2018. No. 1. P. 97–100.

P.D. Blokhin On controversial points in the understanding of the amicus curiae institute and its possible appearance in Russian constitutional proceedings. Comparative Constitutional Review.  2015.  № 1.  P. 130–143[Russ.].


buy Instagram followers Instafollowers hacklink hacklink


instagram beğeni satın al beğeni satın al elektronik sigara elektronik sigara likit satın al