NORWAY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Andreas Stang Lund, Per Conradi Andersen, Alexander Daae and Emilie Wilberg, Kvale Advokatfirma DA
Kvale Advokatfirma DA Haakon VIIs g 10 0161 Oslo Norway Tel: 22 47 97 00
Email: post@kvale.no Web: www.kvale.no
Reuse of Audio and Video Recordings in Appeal Cases: a Significant Shift in Norwegian Procedure In April 2026, the Norwegian Parliament adopted leg- islation providing that audio and video recordings will, as a general rule, be reused in proceedings before the courts of appeal. The reform means that record- ings of the testimony of parties, witnesses and experts from the proceedings in the district courts will form the basis of the appeal hearing to a much greater extent than before, rather than the evidence being given again orally. Under the legal framework applicable prior to the legislative reform, the starting point was largely the same in both civil and criminal cases: audio and video recordings of parties, witnesses and experts were to be made during main hearings and appeal hearings. However, the rules contained an exception allowing recordings to be omitted where the court lacked the necessary technical equipment. Due to a general lack of such equipment in Norwegian courts, this excep- tion effectively became the norm until 2025. As a con- sequence, appeal hearings were predominantly based on new oral testimony given directly before the Court of Appeal. The new framework and its intended effect With the recently adopted legislation, the legislature has proceeded on the assumption that all Norwegian courts will, within a short period of time, be equipped with the necessary audio and video recording technol- ogy. At the same time, the procedural rules have been adjusted to facilitate the reuse of such recordings in appellate proceedings as the general approach, instead of repeating witness and party testimony. This represents a significant shift from previous practice.
The purpose of the reform is to allow appeal proceed- ings to focus to a greater extent on legal assessment and the evaluation of evidence based on the record- ings from the district court. As a result, both judges and counsel are likely to face a new procedural reality in the appellate courts. During the preparatory work, it was debated whether courts should be under an obligation to play record- ings in appeal proceedings, or whether the use of recordings should take the form of a discretionary “may” rule. The Ministry initially proposed a discre- tionary approach. The proposals concerning the reuse of audio and video recordings were subject to pub- lic consultation from 21 October 2024 to 10 January 2025, and the responses revealed broad disagreement as to whether courts should be obliged to replace repeated testimony with the playback of recordings at second instance. Arguments in favour of reuse It was argued that testimony given nearer in time to the events will be more likely to be accurate than tes- timony given after a longer time, and that the reuse of testimony by way of playback contributes to better- informed decisions. Allowing the playback of evidence in the appellate court also reduces the risk of testi- mony being amended between instances. In addition, the reuse of recordings spares victims and next of kin the burden of having to give evidence again in appeal proceedings. Another important aspect relates to case management and predictability: where it is clarified that a recording will be played, the court will know in advance how long the testimony will take, which will improve pre-
435 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook