An amicable expert report cannot be the only evidence that a judge will accept, even if all parties attended the expert report. This is what the Court of Cassation just recalled in the judgment of the Third Civil Chamber on May 14, 2020.
A company customer refuses to pay for stairway repairs. The construction site is stopping. The company insurer has carried out an amicable expertise in the presence of the company and the customer, which concludes that there are no defects. In turn, the client has a new expertise carried out in the presence of the company and its insurer and which concludes that the work will resume. The Tribunal d'instance de Dijon, seised by the client, orders the company to bear the cost of the work on the sole basis of the report submitted by the expert commissioned by the client.
The Court of Cassation quashes and quashes the judgment rendered, recalling that in civil proceedings, the judge must himself ensure respect for the principle of contradiction, a fundamental principle. She adds that the judge cannot make his decision solely on the expertise of a technician chosen by one of the parties, even if it was done in the presence of all of them.
