Analysis of the adequacy of medical expert reports in civil cases in light of the criteria established by the new Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure

Abstract

Introduction: Medical expert reports are regarded as one of the most compelling forms of proof in judicial proceedings due to their technical and scientific nature. They are prepared by specialists appointed by the court to assist in resolving legal disputes. Until 2015, there were no specific regulations regarding the required format of such reports, a gap that was addressed with the enactment of the new Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which aimed to make the judiciary more efficient and accessible to all. Objective: To assess the technical adequacy of expert reports in cases adjudicated by the 1st and 2nd Civil Courts of Mogi das Cruzes, in accordance with the criteria established by the new CPC. Method: Eligible expert reports were identified on the e-SAJ website and subsequently analyzed for compliance with the prescribed standards. Results: All reports were found to be partially or entirely non-compliant with the recommended guidelines. Discussion: The absence of a clear statement of purpose, specification of the methods employed, substantiated technical and scientific analysis with the appropriate use of sources and references, and provision of conclusive and specific answers compromise the quality and reliability of the reports. These shortcomings undermine a fair and accessible justice system that upholds the rights to a full defense and due process through adversarial proceedings. Conclusion: A decade after the enactment of the new CPC, expert practice has not yet fully adapted to its established criteria. Recognizing the expert report as a cornerstone of judicial decisions is crucial to ensure that such decisions are grounded in solid evidence and scientific rigor, thereby reflecting the commitment of medicine to justice and ethics.