What type of opinion is generally not admissible according to Evidence Act Section 76?

What type of opinion is generally not admissible according to Evidence Act Section 76?

• A. Lay opinion
• B. Expert opinion
• C. Both Lay and Expert opinions
• D. Opinions based on experience

Answer: (A)

The answer indicates that lay opinions are generally not admissible according to Evidence Act Section 76. Lay opinions refer to the views or thoughts of individuals who do not possess specialized knowledge in a particular field relevant to the case. The rationale behind this principle is that laypersons may not have the qualifications or expertise required to provide reliable or accurate assessments on specialized subjects, making their opinions less trustworthy in a legal context. In contrast, expert opinions are admissible because experts have the requisite training, experience, or qualifications, allowing them to offer informed views based on their specialized knowledge. The legal system recognizes that the opinions of experts can assist the court in understanding complex issues that require technical knowledge beyond that possessed by an average person. Thus, the distinction is crucial: lay opinions lack the necessary reliability and expertise to be admissible in court, whereas expert opinions are valued for their contribution to the adjudication process.

The answer indicates that lay opinions are generally not admissible according to Evidence Act Section 76. Lay opinions refer to the views or thoughts of individuals who do not possess specialized knowledge in a particular field relevant to the case. The rationale behind this principle is that laypersons may not have the qualifications or expertise required to provide reliable or accurate assessments on specialized subjects, making their opinions less trustworthy in a legal context.

In contrast, expert opinions are admissible because experts have the requisite training, experience, or qualifications, allowing them to offer informed views based on their specialized knowledge. The legal system recognizes that the opinions of experts can assist the court in understanding complex issues that require technical knowledge beyond that possessed by an average person.

Thus, the distinction is crucial: lay opinions lack the necessary reliability and expertise to be admissible in court, whereas expert opinions are valued for their contribution to the adjudication process.