Computer systems expertise

Nowadays, technology is very present in our lives, so that more and more, computer evidence is part of the day to day in the judicial field. One of the most common cases is the accreditation or challenge of events that occurred in computer systems.

A computer system is a set of elements that makes the automatic processing of information possible. These elements refer to three types of components:

  • Physical component: It is made up of all the electronic and mechanical devices that perform the calculations and information management.
  • Logical component: These are the applications and data that the physical components of the system work with.
  • Human component: It is made up of both the users who work with the computers and those who develop the applications.

In short, we could say that a computer system allows the obtaining, storage, processing and issuance of information.

There are computer systems of all kinds, but the most common in terms of the expertise of computer systems, are those of business management and websites.

We have to bear in mind that the field of computer systems is totally unknown to the courts of justice, so it is essential to provide an expert opinion on them. If an expert opinion of computer systems is not carried out properly, not only will the opposing party be able to challenge the evidence, but the court itself will be unable to understand what has happened and will not be able to render a judgment adequately.

Frequent cases

The most frequent types of orders are:

  • Commission of crimes through the use of computer systems: For example, when an employee misuses the computer system provided by the employer.
  • Damages suffered by a computer system: They refer to the deterioration or destruction, total or partial, of a computer system, whose patrimonial damage is economically assessable.
  • Failures, malpractices and negligence in the development, implementation and start-up of computer systems: For example, when a technical project does not comply with the agreement.
  • Determine the amount of damage caused: Structural damage, loss of information, etc.

Some interesting judgements

“The appealed judgment considers that the contractual breach has occurred from two extremes: on the one hand, regarding the term established in the contract as essential. And on the other, in the defects in the work carried out. The first aspect is evidenced in the email of 3-30-15 (folio 204), in which the reasons for the termination of the contract are expressed: 7 months late, when the 5th stipulation of the contract set a maximum term (folio 46) of 2 months from 26-5-14, considering a delay of more than one month as a ‘critical incidence'”.

“Secondly, and in relation to the assessment of the expert report, it should be noted that, although the experts should not supplant the decision of the Judicial Branch, but rather help shape it, their intervention in relation to the issue discussed here is decisive. Starting then, ex art. 348 LEC, of the rules of sound criticism, we understand that the expert report provided is rigorous, and must be evaluated in the same terms as the judgment appealed against, evidencing the numerous defects in the execution of the work entrusted to the plaintiff (It is to mean section 4 of chapter 8 of the same, folios 150 152), in which, within the Functional Examination of the Application, the numerous defects and failures of the work carried out are reported, making the expert say that ‘the application is clearly incomplete, presenting serious execution errors, as well as absence of required functionality and incorrect performance of tasks’, adding as a conclusion (after considering the content of the opinion reproduced, avoiding unnecessary repetitions) that ‘the computer application examined does not constitute a finished product in any case …, it is not a truly professional work'”.

“The plaintiff, a company that provides technology to its ccustomers for the global distribution through the internet of tickets for shows and leisure activities, which on July 14, 2014 signed a contract with … for the implementation of the software program …, a contract that the defendant breached because the platform never worked properly. This contractual breach of … has caused the plaintiff some damages quantified in the amount claimed.


This type of evidence can be contested and therefore, rejected, ruining the entire procedure. To determine whether this type of evidence can display probative value, the forensic analysis of a certified computer expert is essential.
Likewise, we must bear in mind that in recent years, the number of works and computer expert opinions that are dismissed in litigation and are not taken into account at the time of sentencing. The reason is none other than a huge increase in the number of computer experts who are not legally authorized to act before the courts, and who therefore incur in the crime of professional intrusion. We can find a clear example in the Judgment of the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid 531/2017, Social Chamber, Section 4, July 19th , 2017, in which it is stated in the first point of the grounds of law, that:

“The appealed ruling is essentially based on the ineffective and invalid expert evidence that has been provided as the only justification for the facts imputed in the letter of dismissal to the plaintiff, for several reasons explained by the Magistrate of Instance in her ruling. The first is because she understands that the expert presented by the company lacks an official degree in computer science, although at this point it is recognized that the expert is the person who provides computer assistance to the company as a freelancer, which implies at least a practical knowledge of what he is hired for. On the other hand, the informal nature of the expert evidence and the questioning of the chain of custody are argued. Special mention is also made of the breach of the guarantees of the plaintiff’s right to privacy at the time of carrying out the inspection and search of the computer equipment, declaring it proven that the plaintiff was not present. In short, the Magistrate of Instance, evaluating this evidence and the testimonies provided at the oral trial concludes that the defects in the practice of the expert evidence carried out by the company prevent granting probative value to this means of proof, and given that it is essential to prove the facts imputed to the plaintiff, declares the dismissal unjustified.”

The computer test must be certified in a computer expert opinion, prepared by a legally qualified computer expert. In our Frequently Asked Questions section you can find more information about it.

Why hire our services?

From FORENSICTECH we provide our clients with the security of having:

  • A computer expert specialized in your case, collegiate and legally authorized to act in the Spanish courts of justice.
  • Appropriate instruments and specialized software to develop your expert report.
  • Legally recognized chain of custody investigation and assurance methods.
  • An effective and efficient work in the requested expert report.
  • A certified computer expert opinion, which greatly increases your credibility and reliability before judicial bodies, as it is endorsed by a professional association.
  • A computer expert capable of facing the ratification in oral proceedings in all jurisdictional orders.
  • Our performance in all the courts of justice throughout Spain in all jurisdictional areas.


Receive the latest news by email
Remember that you can unsubscribe sending an email to
Skip to content