- governmental expert institutions should not be preferred to non-governmental ones (para 1);

 

- at the same time, governmental expert institutions may charge a fee for expert examination only when it was commissioned to them upon the motion or by the consent of participants to the case; as for non-governmental expert institutions and individual experts, they may charge a fee also in cases when expert examination is performed at  the initiative of the court; in such cases the payment of the fee is to be made at the expense of federal budget (para 21);

 

- if at the consideration of a case questions arise which clarification requires special expertise and for which by virtue of the Commercial Procedure Code the expert examination may not be commissioned at the initiative of the court, the latter in the absence of a motion or consent to commissioning of expert examination from participants of the case shall explain to them the consequences of the lack of such motion or their consent (para 3);

 

- the Commercial Procedure Code does not require consent from all the participants of the case, therefore an expert examination may be commissioned even in view of consent of a single participant of the case who in such a case shall put on the deposit account of the court the monies subject to payment to experts (the previous Decree required the consent of all participants which effectively enabled any participant to obstruct an expert examination); having the consent to expert examination from several participants of the case, these participants must – unless they agree otherwise – must put in equal parts on the deposit of the court the amounts to be paid to experts (para 6);

 

- the questions of law and of legal consequences of the assessment of evidence may not be addressed to experts. All the same, for the purposes of establishing the contents of the rules of foreign law, a court may turn for assistance to competent bodies and organisations and enlist the services of a specialist or an expert  (para 8);

 

- in the event that the person having control over things to be examined does not discharge the duty to present them for examination or to give access to them, the court may impose upon him a judicial fine  (para 10);

 

- the conclusion of an expert does not have a predetermined force for a court and is subject to assessment alongside with other evidence. At the same time, following the results of the assessment the court must give reasons by which it accepted or turned down the evidence available in the file of the case (para 12);

 

- the conclusion of an expert made at the consideration of another case, and also the conclusion of an expert obtained within an extrajudicial expert examination, may not be regarded as expert conclusions within the case at hand. Such conclusions may, however, be given the status of others document admitted as an evidence (para 13).