Judicial principles and studies
Appointment of Experts and Land Expropriation/Waste Plots: Admissibility and Expert Report Requirements
Parties may agree, expressly or implicitly, to appoint experts outside the register; courts must ensure experts explain their pricing basis and the status of plots as waste, and account for any expropriation when calculating compensation.
Compensation and insurance
Judicial principles and studies
Updated: 10 September 2026
Editorial summary of a judicial principle or decision; consult the source below and do not treat the firm as the author of the decision.
Smart reading summary
Understand and share the study quickly
Parties may agree, expressly or implicitly, to appoint experts outside the register; courts must ensure experts explain their pricing basis and the status of plots as waste, and account for any expropriation when calculating compensation.
Key points
- Subject
- Summary
- Practical significance
Useful for: Useful for initial reading and identifying questions that may need legal review.
This automatic summary is based on the published text. It is not legal advice and does not replace checking official sources and reviewing the facts with a qualified lawyer.
AI generation is optional and subject to Gemini usage limits. Do not send client data or attachments from this card.
Subject
- Parties may agree, expressly or implicitly (by not objecting), to appoint experts who are not listed in the official register, pursuant to Article 84/1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. An appellate court’s selection of such experts is not unlawful if opposing counsel did not object at appointment or upon filing the report.
Summary
- Where the case file lacks indications that experts relied on baseline prices or local land sale data, and the experts did not attach copies or notes of relevant sale contracts, the court cannot verify whether the experts’ valuations match market reality. - The court should therefore require experts to clarify the bases of their pricing and to address the question of non-possibility of using the plots described as waste—even if those plots are combined with the plaintiff’s adjacent parcels—including assessment against building and urban-planning rules and consideration of suitability for uses such as office organization. - Experts should state when the plots became non-buildable waste and identify under which expropriation(s) that status arose, so that compensation can be calculated in light of the applicable expropriation context. - If the expert report references multiple expropriations, reliance on the report without these clarifications is premature and may render the judgment vulnerable to reversal. This is a general educational summary for informational purposes only; it is not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Frequently asked questions
Subject?
- Parties may agree, expressly or implicitly (by not objecting), to appoint experts who are not listed in the official register, pursuant to Article 84/1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. An appellate court’s selection of such experts is not unlawful if opposing counsel did not object at appointment or upon filing the report.
Summary?
- Where the case file lacks indications that experts relied on baseline prices or local land sale data, and the experts did not attach copies or notes of relevant sale contracts, the court cannot verify whether the experts’ valuations match market reality. - The court should therefore require experts to clarify the bases of their pricing and to address the question of non-possibility of using the plots described as waste—even if those plots are combined with the plaintiff’s adjacent parcels—including assessment against building and urban-planning rules and consideration of suitability for uses such as office organization. - Experts should state when the plots became non-buildable waste and identify under which expropriation(s) that status arose, so that compensation can be calculated in light of the applicable expropriation context. - If the expert report references multiple expropriations, reliance on the report without these clarifications is premature and may render the judgment vulnerable to reversal. This is a general educational summary for informational purposes only; it is not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance?
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.
Study collection
Real estate and leases
Browse the other studies in this subject through its dedicated topical section.
Open study collectionA related service path
Commercial and civil litigation
If this study is close to your matter, review the service scope and contact the firm to discuss the facts and documents.
Review the related serviceRelated Jordanian-law guides
Contextual links to related public guide routes; they remain limited to Jordanian law and do not replace matter review.