Six forensic subjects covered by collaborating experts: structures, geotechnics, buildings, installations, materials and public works. Standing from academia, site practice, laboratory or public administration.
A matter is assigned to the subject the dispute actually turns on. When none of them fits, the instruction is declined.
A report stands on what its signatory can evidence before the court. That evidence has six different origins, and none of them substitutes for the others.
When the disputed subject requires knowledge the forensic lead cannot evidence on their own: the state of the art of a discipline, a testing campaign with specific instrumentation, or hands-on practice of a particular construction procedure. The decision follows the subject of the matter, not the availability of the collaborator.
The forensic lead keeps the relationship with counsel, the preparation of the case file and the procedural responsibility. The collaborating expert intervenes where their judgement is decisive — the calculation model, the testing campaign, the interpretation of results — and drafts the technical conclusions within their field. They sign what they endorse and confirm it in court under article 347 of the Spanish Civil Procedure Act.
A signatory whose record is documentary — publications, professional registration, evidenced years of site direction, laboratory accreditation — gives the court something it can verify. Under cross-examination, that record is fact rather than a party's assertion.
The register admits academic and professional profiles on equal terms. The terms of collaboration and the real availability of instructions are set out on the registration page.