Percy and Percy

In the Family Court of Australia, Mr Percy (the applicant husband) and Ms Percy (the respondent wife) were involved in proceedings concerning the alteration of property interests and spousal maintenance. The wife sought the appointment of Mr B, an accountant, as a single expert witness to provide evidence regarding her entitlement to a lump sum payment for her lifetime income needs. The husband opposed this application, arguing it was misconceived and based on a false premise, and sought its dismissal.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to appoint a single expert witness as requested by the wife, or to allow each party to adduce their own expert evidence. The court was required to consider the Family Law Rules regarding single expert witnesses and balance the interests of justice and the economical and expedient conduct of the case, particularly given the approaching final hearing date. The court also had to determine the appropriate timetable for the filing and service of expert evidence and other required documents.

Justice Bennett, acknowledging the approaching final hearing, decided to disregard the single expert witness rules in the interests of justice and the efficient conduct of the case. The court reasoned that while single expert rules aim to reduce disputes, they should not abrogate the court's responsibility to accept relevant evidence. To avoid a situation where a single expert is appointed and then each party seeks their own expert, the court determined that each party should be entitled to rely upon expert evidence other than from a single expert witness, as permitted by Rule 15.51 of the Family Law Rules. The court made detailed orders regarding the filing and service of evidence, including expert reports, and vacated a previous mention date, listing the matter for a new mention date. The application for a single expert witness was dismissed, and the matter was noted as remaining listed for final hearing.