Ramsey & Ramsey (No. 2)

In the matter of *Ramsey & Ramsey (No. 2)*, Kent J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the Applicant Husband (Mr Ramsey) and the First Respondent Wife (Ms Ramsey) concerning the valuation of shares in B Pty Ltd and a property owned by the company. The dispute arose in the context of a finding of oppression, and the parties sought an updated valuation of the company and its assets, including land, to ascertain their current fair value.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether it was necessary and appropriate to obtain a further valuation of the company and the land owned by it, given the previous finding of oppression. The Court was required to determine if there was utility in obtaining an updated valuation, particularly as it could not be certain of the current fair value of the shares or the potential increase in the value of the land.

Kent J reasoned that an updated valuation was necessary to provide certainty regarding the current fair value of the shares in B Pty Ltd, including the 49 per cent interest held by D Pty Ltd, to be valued without a minority discount. The Court also considered it important to obtain a valuation of the property located at P Street, Suburb Q, Queensland, as its value may have increased. Consequently, the Court appointed a single expert, Mr DD of EE Accountants, to report on the value of the company shares and FF Valuers to report on the property valuation. The Applicant Husband and First Respondent Wife were ordered to meet the costs of these valuations in the first instance, with the ultimate responsibility to be determined at a later stage.