Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2014

ANGLO-AMERİKAN VE FRANSIZ HUKUKLARINDA BİLİRKİŞİLİK KURUMUNA GENEL BAKIŞ

Pages
2115–2162
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
🔖

Cite This Article

YALABIK, F. T. (2014). ANGLO-AMERİKAN VE FRANSIZ HUKUKLARINDA BİLİRKİŞİLİK KURUMUNA GENEL BAKIŞ. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2014, 2115–2162. https://ajindex.com/articles/221916

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Abraham, Henry J.: The Judicial Process, An Introductory Analysis Of The Courts Of The United States, England, and France, New York 1998.
  2. Altıparmak, Kerem: “Due Process Of Law” Kavramının Amerikan Hukukundaki Yeri Üzerine Bir İnceleme, AÜHFD 1996, cilt 45, sayı 1- 4, s. 219. Angell, Ernest: The Amicus Curiae American Development Of English Institutions, International And Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 16, 1967, s. 1017-1044.
  3. Bartholomeuz, Lance: The Amicus Curiae Before International Courts And Tribunals, Non-State Actors and International Law, vol. 5, 2005, s. 209-286.
  4. Blom-Cooper QC, Sir Louis: Experts In The Civil Courts, Expert Witness Institute, Oxford 2006.
  5. Borel, Jacques/Boyd, Stephen M.: Opportunities For And Obstacles to Obtaining Evidence In France For Use In Litigation In The United States, International Law Review, vol. 13, 1979, s. 35-45.
  6. Brazil, Wayne D.: Special Masters In Complex Cases: Extending The Judiciary Or Reshaping Adjudication?, The University Of Chicago Law Review, vol. 53/2, Spring 1986, s. 394-423.
  7. Browne, M. Neil/Williamson, Carrie L./Barkacs, Linda L.: The Perspectival Nature Of Expert Testimony In The United States, England, Korea, And France, Connecticut Journal of International Law, vol. 18, 2002.
  8. Bryant, James R.: The Office of Master In Chancery: Colonial Development, American Bar Association Journal, vol. 40, July 1954, s. 595-598.
  9. Budak, Ali Cem: Anglo Amerikan Medeni Yargılama Hukukunda Bilirkişilik (Uzman Tanıklar), İstanbul Barosu Dergisi, 1991, sayı 10- 12, s. 827-841.
  10. Cecil, Joe S./Willging, Thomas E.: Court-Appointed Experts, Reference Manual On Scientific Evidence, 1994, s. 529-573.
  11. Champagne, Anthony/Easterling, Danny/Shuman, Daniel W./Tomkins, Alan/Whitaker, Elizabeth: Are Court-Appointed Experts The Solution To The Problems Of Expert Testimony, Judicature, vol. 84/4, January- February 2001, s. 178-183.
  12. Chan, Johannes: Amicus Curiae and Non-Party Intervention Focus on The Ma Case, Hong-Kong Law Journal, vol. 27, 1997, s. 391-404.
  13. Cope, Sophia: Ripe For Revision: A Critique Of Federal Rule Of Evidence 706 and The Use Of Court-Appointed Experts, Gonzaga Law Review, vol. 39, 2003/04, s. 163-196.
  14. Corbally, Sarah. F./Bross, Donald. C./Flango, Victor. E: Filing of Amicus Curiae Briefs in State Courts of Last Resort: 1960-2000, Justice System Journal, vol. 25, 2004, s. 39-56.
  15. Covey, Frank M.: Amicus Curiae: Friend Of The Court, De Paul Law Review, vol. 9, 1959-1960, s. 3037. DeCoux, Elizabeth L.: The Admission Of Un