Property valuation dispute workflow
Valuations drive the pool. A disputed valuation left unchallenged locks the client into a number that may be wrong by hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Family Law Rules 2021 (Cth) default to a single expert, but the Rules contain a clear pathway to put questions, reconvene the expert, and in a proper case seek leave for an adversarial report.
This is an 8-step workflow for responding to or challenging a single expert valuation of real property, a business, or a self-managed super fund in a Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79 matter. It runs from objection letter through questions, conference of experts, and application for leave to adduce adversarial evidence.
Before you start
- Single expert report received and served on both parties
- Client instructions on the disputed components of the valuation
- Copy of the letter of instruction and all material provided to the expert
- Identification of a proposed shadow expert if adversarial leave will be sought
The workflow
Audit the single expert report
Read the report against r 7.04 requirements and the Harmonised Expert Witness Code. Identify methodology (direct comparison, capitalisation, DCF), inputs, comparables, assumptions, and any material omissions.
Brief a shadow expert for a critique
Engage a shadow expert on a privileged basis to critique the methodology and identify the specific errors or omissions. Keep the critique privileged pending any application for leave.
Draft and serve written questions under r 7.12
Prepare written questions to the single expert directed at clarifying assumptions, testing comparables, and exposing calculation errors. Serve within the Rules timeframe.
Review the expert's written answers
Assess whether the written answers resolve the concerns, narrow the dispute, or expose a fundamental flaw. Update the shadow expert's critique based on the clarifications.
Request a conference of experts if retained
If a second expert has already been jointly retained or leave has previously been given, request a conference of experts under the Rules to produce a joint statement of agreed and disputed issues.
Apply for leave to adduce adversarial evidence
If the single expert report remains deficient, file an application in a case seeking leave under r 7.08 to adduce evidence from the shadow expert, supported by an affidavit exhibiting the critique.
Prepare the cross-examination plan
If leave is granted or the single expert is to be cross-examined at trial, build a concise cross-examination plan directed at methodology, comparables, and the specific inputs the shadow expert disputes.
Recalculate the pool on each scenario
Produce a side-by-side pool calculation on the single expert, shadow expert, and any midpoint figures. Use the range to inform a Calderbank offer or consent position.
What you will have at the end
A resolved valuation — through agreed inputs, a revised single expert figure, or a judicial finding on competing expert evidence — giving a defensible pool figure for final settlement or hearing.
Common issues
- Letter of instruction to the single expert was incomplete or biased
- Comparables used by the expert are outside the relevant market
- Going concern vs asset sale methodology disputed for business valuations
- SMSF valuation does not account for contingent tax on wind-up
- Leave application filed too close to trial to be practical
Run this workflow on a real matter
Quillio audits the single expert report against the Harmonised Code, drafts r 7.12 questions targeting the weakest inputs, and produces the affidavit for leave under r 7.08. See /practice-areas/family-lawyers or start a free trial at /free-trial.
General guide only — not legal advice. Confirm the current Family Law Rules, the applicable expert evidence code, and any practice directions in the registry where your matter is listed.
Try this workflow with Quillio.
Quillio can run this workflow on a real matter, with citations to current AU authority on every step. The free trial requires no credit card.
Start your free trial